knowledgeis | (no subject)

(no subject)

Ah, I should talk more on this... Even though school work has been busy. A lot of writing to do-- which I guess I don't mind, but it takes up a lot of time.

The... person I know on here-- they went ahead and showed me a bunch of older tournaments for Duel Monsters that they had on video, since they got brought up recently. Like, stuff from back when the game just started getting really popular.

Geeze... They really didn't know what they wanted the game to be yet, did they? It's kinda weird to watch them, when I've only really got somewhat of a grasp on the rules right now.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Not to mention the game's design asthetic was MUCH more grizzly and horror leaning in the 90s when it started up.

When did the game's design start changing, though?

I think around the time of the Lost Millennium Booster Pack or so? It started drifting to a more child friendly asthetic.

Just better audience there, I guess?

That, and early on, if memory serves, Mr. Crawford was in an especially dark period due to the death of his wife, from what I've read on bibliographical information.

Ohhh. Yeah, I guess that makes sense. Reflecting the period of time.

Thus when the game expanded after Battle City, they likely went for a more kid friendly asthetic.

Hence Vehicroids, Elemental HEROes, and the like. Now they seem to be trying the more Magic the Gathering style of semi-realistic art every so often, to varied results.

Hnnmm... I mean, it's neat that there's a lot of variety. But I guess it makes it hard to pinpoint what the game's really trying to go for.

A bit of everything at this point. It's mostly just experimenting.

(no subject)

knowledgeis - 2016-02-28 08:40 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

whitrthanwhite - 2016-02-28 09:38 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

knowledgeis - 2016-02-28 17:02 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

whitrthanwhite - 2016-02-29 19:19 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

knowledgeis - 2016-02-29 19:30 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

whitrthanwhite - 2016-02-29 19:44 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

knowledgeis - 2016-02-29 19:58 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

whitrthanwhite - 2016-03-01 00:39 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

knowledgeis - 2016-03-01 02:17 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

whitrthanwhite - 2016-03-01 02:24 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

knowledgeis - 2016-03-01 02:39 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

whitrthanwhite - 2016-03-01 03:08 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

knowledgeis - 2016-03-01 03:17 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

whitrthanwhite - 2016-03-01 19:07 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

knowledgeis - 2016-03-01 19:39 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

whitrthanwhite - 2016-03-01 20:27 (UTC) - Expand

I wonder if we're in the middle of another period of "Don't know what the game should be"

Ground Duels, Action Duels, Action Card Action Duels and Riding Duels are all in vogue and I'm hearing more rumbles of Riding Action Duels more and more.

Why are there so many different styles?

Clash between Leo Corporation and Kaiba Corp.

Leo Corp holds much of the influence over the Action Duel System.

Kaiba Corp holds many of the controlling interests in Riding Duels.

And I2 basically makes money off of both.

Edited 2016-02-28 08:08 (UTC)

It... kinda gets confusing.

I already have a bad enough time keeping the rules in order for just, you know, normal duels.

That and it's to keep public interest up, so the game doesn't fold, I guess. Bigger and badder thrills?

You'd think that the constant marketing would help.

The issue I hear is "People will take it for granted" and not keep buying in, and poof.

So complexity syndrome??

Edited 2016-02-28 08:36 (UTC)

It feels like it's gonna end up having an opposite effect.

(no subject)

sword_of_dracoheart - 2016-02-28 09:39 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

knowledgeis - 2016-02-28 17:02 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

sword_of_dracoheart - 2016-02-29 19:19 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

knowledgeis - 2016-02-29 19:30 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

sword_of_dracoheart - 2016-02-29 19:50 (UTC) - Expand

To be fair, that's pretty common for games in their first year or two or three.

They're typically more made for selling than sustainable structure. Lack of elaborate mythologies.

Magic the Gathering, Vanguard and Duel Monsters are all similar in this regard.

To be fair, I don't think I've ever seen any other card game have so many... technological gimmicks, I guess is the way to put it.

Though on the other hand, not a lot of them have holograms.

Vanguard I think tried with some organization named FIVA, but it got shut out by Kaiba Corp for early lawsuits of imitating Duel Disks without obtaining patents or paying royalty fees.

That and its game board is unwieldy.

Magic I think the creators just don't give a damn and the game doesn't do well with a portable combat system like Yu-Gi-Oh! does with fixed slots.

I guess that's what happens when you try to get too close to what Duel Monsters is doing... I don't really see Vanguard around, and "Magic"... That one's a lot more Western, isn't it?

And marketed at a much older demographic than Vanguard or Duel Monsters.

Yeah, though it makes it weird that a lot of teenagers and adults play Duel Monsters, and even use it as a cornerstone for things.

Could you explain your argument a bit deeper?

Well... You mentioned that "Magic" is marketed towards an older demographic, right?

Duel Monsters and Vanguard are traditionally marketed towards kids. Like, middle school level.

So why is it that there're highschools and other schools like that focus on teaching dueling? Why do businesses put a lot of focus on it, to the point where having a sponsor duelist is actually pretty important? It even seems like, in my own research, that a lot of rich folks get into having their kids learn dueling professionally as a demonstrative thing. It's something I've kinda wondered when it comes to the real focus of the game.