|
|
| Want to Win the Million Gold? |
| Hell yes!! :D |
|
100% |
[ 1386 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 1386 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 3:19 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 3:20 pm
Ok fine, but, it's still a new take on the same 20 monster types.
that's what i'm getting at. yu-gi-oh will always use the same 20 monster types, There won't be any modification to that standard, no matter what new monsters they come up with.
i could have sworn that the fusion deck, main deck, and sideboard size were always limited to those sizes. (granted the sideboard rules were a lot foggier then than they are now, but the actual cocenpt behind the sizes appear to be the same.) Plus, I can't fathom why anyone would want a deck to be larger than 45 cards.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 3:21 pm
wellwisher Ok fine, but, it's still a new take on the same 20 monster types. that's what i'm getting at. yu-gi-oh will always use the same 20 monster types, There won't be any modification to that standard, no matter what new monsters they come up with. i could have sworn that the fusion deck, main deck, and sideboard size were always limited to those sizes. (granted the sideboard rules were a lot foggier then than they are now, but the actual cocenpt behind the sizes appear to be the same.) Plus, I can't fathom why anyone would want a deck to be larger than 45 cards. technicy before you could have as many as you wanted. and did you forget psychic types it is truely a new type.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 3:24 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 3:29 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 3:29 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 3:29 pm
That makes one new type since I started back in 2002. (total 21...)
That just doesn't seem like enough for an evolving card game.
I'm going to make a reference to magic here again. (As it started the TCG, and is the longest lasting TCG.) magic, has at least 216 creature types, and has been consistently adding new creature types pretty much every set. (or at least bringing creature types that don't have as many cards to the fore)
it's not really fair to compare a 2002 TCG that's following in the echoing footsteps of a TCG that started the TCG craze back in 1994, but as pokemon, Yu-Gi-Oh, gundum, Harry Potter, Dragonball Z, Inuyasha, and many other games (I skipped about 15 other TCG's that have almost had their moment of fame) try and fail, so far only three have kept going. Pokemon which was much, much bigger before they added G3 pokemon. Yu-gi-oh, and magic the gathering.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 3:31 pm
wellwisher That makes one new type since I started back in 2002. (total 21...) That just doesn't seem like enough for an evolving card game. I'm going to make a reference to magic here again. (As it started the TCG, and is the longest lasting TCG.) magic, has at least 216 creature types, and has been consistently adding new creature types pretty much every set. (or at least bringing creature types that don't have as many cards to the fore) it's not really fair to compare a 2002 TCG that's following in the echoing footsteps of a TCG that started the TCG craze back in 1994, but as pokemon, Yu-Gi-Oh, gundum, Harry Potter, Dragonball Z, Inuyasha, and many other games (I skipped about 15 other TCG's that have almost had their moment of fame) try and fail, so far only three have kept going. Pokemon which was much, much bigger before they added G3 pokemon. Yu-gi-oh, and magic the gathering. yes but it is changing and they left open the chance for more types to come.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 3:34 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 3:35 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 3:35 pm
Overall though, the card face does make it feel like there are less options. And so often the abilities feel overused.
besides the new Synchro, most abilities could be grouped into burn (damage to some player), bounce (return something to it's owners hand), boost (attack or lifepoint boost), destroy(card in hand, in play, cards in the deck), remove(cards from the game from somewhere), shuffle(swap cards in hand with cards in deck, shuffle deck, reverse a postiion of a card, face up/face down, attack/defense), neutralize (stop something from working)
Always felt very limiting. Some abilities were powerful because of how they were worded, but they all felt like overused abilities.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 3:37 pm
wellwisher Overall though, the card face does make it feel like there are less options. And so often the abilities feel overused. besides the new Synchro, most abilities could be grouped into burn (damage to some player), bounce (return something to it's owners hand), boost (attack or lifepoint boost), destroy(card in hand, in play, cards in the deck), remove(cards from the game from somewhere), shuffle(swap cards in hand with cards in deck, shuffle deck, reverse a postiion of a card, face up/face down, attack/defense), neutralize (stop something from working) Always felt very limiting. Some abilities were powerful because of how they were worded, but they all felt like overused abilities. yes yugioh has it flaws but magic probely is not perfect either.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 3:41 pm
disliker of the mary sue yes yugioh has it flaws but magic probely is not perfect either. No, no it isn't. although they're nice enough to write up errata all the time for any overpowered through how it's phrased, cards. (as opposed to just remaking the card with the correct wording, which, sometimes happens but only if it's deemed worthy of being reprinted.) mostly I'm just harping on the card design layout. not the actual gameplay.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 3:43 pm
wellwisher disliker of the mary sue yes yugioh has it flaws but magic probely is not perfect either. No, no it isn't. although they're nice enough to write up errata all the time for any overpowered through how it's phrased, cards. (as opposed to just remaking the card with the correct wording, which, sometimes happens but only if it's deemed worthy of being reprinted.) mostly I'm just harping on the card design layout. not the actual gameplay. well yugioh is kind of addicting. and it probely would be impossible to keep track of every single card in magic since it has three times as many cards as yugioh. but there are a few unique effectes it just that most people uses the standard cards.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 3:45 pm
disliker of the mary sue well yugioh is kind of addicting. and it probely would be impossible to keep track of every single card in the game since it has three times as many cards as yugioh. but there are a few unique effectes it just that most people uses the standard cards. mostly it's because the unique effect cards arent' used sicne they don't match strategies that win. The few Spike cards aren't being used by spikes, as it's all about the johnnys of magic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
