ExcaliDrose said:
I am hoping this will change when they go X & Y 6th gen but the 6 pokemon opens up the game a little
TCG Complaint Thread
- Thread starter ashtavakra
- Start date
I am hoping this will change when they go X & Y 6th gen but the 6 pokemon opens up the game a little
Daelum said:
No I do like Pokemon, just not the TCG at the moment. Your post sounds like we should live in a close minded world where we only see one side of things and completely ignore all the flaws. I dont HATE TPCi, I just really dislike how they design a few cards and then just fill their sets up with jank. Sorry you dont want to admit that, but that is one of the biggest flaws in Pokemon how much junk there is compared to how much useful cards there is. And there is really no excuse for it. The sad reality of it is that they are in it to make money 1st and to provide you entertainment second.
I played Pokemon for a few months and honestly its just boring once Laser came out and now things are even more stagnant with Team Plasma Haymaker 2.0 dominating the meta. The meta is just getting more and more narrow. So many decks are just falling by the waste side and less decks are getting better.
I started playing around Boundaries Crossed and used a Ho Oh deck. I liked the deck a lot since it not only was competitive, but it wasnt based around a 2 Pokemon combo. It had variety, it had a lot of techs, it took skill to use, and it could compete. Now a days its a joke what is considered deck construction. People just playing 1-2 trainer card differences is considered being techy, seriously thats the most this game can offer?
Now the meta is so diluted and dull. You either play Team Plasma.dek, Darkrai, Blastoise or Klinklang, the later 2 involving Tropical Beach which still only make them Tier 2 decks since they are so prone to being donked so easily.
I really wish Pokemon was more interesting to play but sadly its not. I still enjoy collecting but the game state to me does not seem like its too exciting.
Just out of curiosity, aren't other card games the same as well? If I remember correctly, for example, yugioh had a TON of useless cards when I played for a little while. I agree that having basically 2-4 decks to choose from is rather boring and changing one card shouldn't be considered "Teching" but it is. I'm just happy the franchise is doing much better than it was before because it will help develop the game more than if sales/the franchise was floundering. Sort of like how Super smash bros went from a simple basic design all the way to Brawl on the Wii because of it's success.
bagoly14 said:
YGO does but Magic and Kaijudo/Duel Masters doesnt. Theres lots of good cards in these games that arent holo or are cheap rares. Its just Pokemon doesnt really care. They dont have anything to prove to anybody since it has a huge fan base and it can pretty much do anything and still have the fans throw money at it.
Honestly them making money wont affect you lol. If anything it just gives them more reason to keep doing what they are doing since they think its right. Its kinda like how in YGO they are still making really broken expensive competitive decks and use the ban list to clean them up after a few months. Then they reprint the cards in special editions and sell thousands. How anyone really falls for this, well I dunno its just laughable. I really dont wanna be rude and call anyone an idiot for not realizing it, but its kind of shocking how the game keeps going since anyone who doesnt like to keep being bored all the time would have stopped following it by now. I think the only way it will ever truely "die" is if the creators just give up since they could make any idea (literally) and have it sell.
But people have to remember this is a "Complaint" thread. Sure TPCi does a lot of things right, but imo not right enough to keep my interest in the TCG.
"lots of" is subjective... Cards like Sableye, Emolga and <insert any non-Ace Spec/Ghetsis Trainer here> are mere uncommons.
Need I remind people that card prices are set by BUYERS, not by companies like TPCi? Crystal Edge, an Ace Spec, for example, is worth less than the uncommon Hypnotoxic Laser, which also happens to be in THEME DECKS. (Yes, I realize the difference in playability between the two, but if rarity were a big issue, it would influence the price much more than that.) Good holos are often around the same price as "bad" Pokemon-EX. Shinies and Full Arts might be rare enough to "blame" TPCi for their prices, but they're completely optional aesthetic upgrades.
As for "filler" cards... I don't see the problem, even if every card were created with the intention of being "good", many would STILL be outclassed and unused. The worst offenders aren't even the ones that debuted in Booster Packs. They're the ones that end up in decks in Japan, so it's not like we're getting cards cut for "filler" to be included. And more cards is still a good thing, IMO, even if they suck. (I can see why people would argue this, given it makes the more "desirable" cards harder to pull, but they give more variety to casual players that care more about using their favourite Pokemon than being competitive, drawing more people to play the game, and can occasionally become relevant to competitive players later down the line. Plus, if nothing else, many can provide better lower stages for good Evolutions, the Dragon Call Gabite debuted in a deck, for example.)
Need I remind people that card prices are set by BUYERS, not by companies like TPCi? Crystal Edge, an Ace Spec, for example, is worth less than the uncommon Hypnotoxic Laser, which also happens to be in THEME DECKS. (Yes, I realize the difference in playability between the two, but if rarity were a big issue, it would influence the price much more than that.) Good holos are often around the same price as "bad" Pokemon-EX. Shinies and Full Arts might be rare enough to "blame" TPCi for their prices, but they're completely optional aesthetic upgrades.
As for "filler" cards... I don't see the problem, even if every card were created with the intention of being "good", many would STILL be outclassed and unused. The worst offenders aren't even the ones that debuted in Booster Packs. They're the ones that end up in decks in Japan, so it's not like we're getting cards cut for "filler" to be included. And more cards is still a good thing, IMO, even if they suck. (I can see why people would argue this, given it makes the more "desirable" cards harder to pull, but they give more variety to casual players that care more about using their favourite Pokemon than being competitive, drawing more people to play the game, and can occasionally become relevant to competitive players later down the line. Plus, if nothing else, many can provide better lower stages for good Evolutions, the Dragon Call Gabite debuted in a deck, for example.)
RiverShock said:
But think about it, Pokemon sets are huge. There always 100+ cards though. The only good commons ever are usually trainers and special energies. Sometimes theres good common Pokemon, but the number is so low. Its like less than a percent of the set of commons thats playable.There wouldnt be such a narrow meta if we had more options.
Prices arent really the issue since every game has expensive cards. Its more of a matter of the value of buying a box that counts more. You could buy a Pokemon box for 90 dollars and end up with 30 in value and the sad part is that all your stuff isnt usable and is just is trade bait to collectors at best. I could open a box of Plasma Freeze and end up with Latios, Heatran, Tornadus and some other junk. It doesn't sound like a good idea to really be buying boxes (unless you buy in bulk or use a scale), or even a few packs since the odds of getting playable cards are extremely low.
The point Im trying to make is that buying packs gives terrible returns because you can drop 20-30 dollars and get absolutely nothing. Nothing that can be put into your deck or be traded. The only saving grace is the Pokemon Online codes and even those arent worth alot.
I feel the sets just need more balance like they had in Diamond and Pearl. In Diamond and Pearl the rares werent bad. There was many playable rares and uncommons that werent trainers or filler for evolution lines. The rares now a days are a joke, they were previous uncommons in Japan of fully evolved or uncommon Pokemon in the video games and get upgraded to rare to sell the idea of getting "1 rare per pack". Its a joke when you really think about it. Plus any legendary Pokemon is automatically made a holo regardless of how bad it is. Its just incredibly senseless and anyone can see that there not even really trying to make the sets balanced in terms of collectability and playability.
If you are complaining about Pokémon set sizes, you have never played MTG, where there are sets with 346 cards. I am sick and tired of listening to people complaining about Catchers, and how ubber it is, but it's been around back in the early days, and no complaints were heard
DrunkSpinda said:
You have grown too use to the catcher and you aren't completely looking at the argument of catcher in this format in a wholehearted and complete comparison to past formats with similar cards such as gust of wind and double gust.
When gust of wind was released, there was 1 set out. Base set. 6 months later jungle came out. Fossile came out 5 months after jungle. So for a 10 months period there were only 3 sets, and of those sets there was only a fraction of the poke powers there are in today's format. There were more pokemon with lower retreat costs, the energy to attack damage ratio was lower than it is today, the game just overall played a lot differently and people that didn't play back then, have no idea the different in style of play compared to now.
Not to mention, there weren't basic pokemon with 180 HP that could potentially hit for 120 damage taking 2 prizes on turn 1. The game was WAY more balanced in the past. Basic pokemon decks were nice, but evolutions were always the most powerful cards. Charizard & Zapdos both did the most damage in the game, and both took 4 energies to attack and had to discard either 2 or all the energies attached to perform those attacks. Very costly.
I know you're a good person, and nothing against you. But at least look at the big picture and do a little research on the game's past before bashing people for complaining about something that takes the fun & strategy out of the game.
I hate Catchers for the reason that every deck pretty much needs to have 4. In a TCG game based around choosing, there shouldn't be something that every deck absolutely needs or it is inferior. If it was an Ace Spec, that could be cool as then certain decks would still probably rather run Scramble Switch or Computer Search. Every single competitive deck (for the most part) using 4 of the same card is stupid. Hypnotoxics are pretty similar in this sense but not quite as bad
Even considering hot "staple" cards the Pokémon TCG still offers plenty of room for creativity. There are still a few cards that could surprise people at a tournament, and some tools have offered very creative uses, lately (Plasma Badge, Float Stone).
im still mad i havent seen Plasma Storm 3 pack Blisters in the stores around my area of the USA and Ebay =/
I agree that decks still are open to creativity. I just don't think there should ever be absolute staples that you cannot compete without. It's supposed to be a 60 card deck not 56 + Catchers
I am probably one to complain about the holos as well, because well, you know...
Imagine this scenario.
This collector, like every collector, think it's cool to collect holos, reverse holos, EX, ex, Lv. X, Primes, full arts, all that stuff, but something is wrong. That was 2 years ago, when this collector got all those cool holo cards. Now, those holos are all curled up, even in sleeves.
Yeah, that's basically what happens to my holos. They curl up like no tomorrow, and it is driving me insane. Holos just don't look cool when they are all curled up.
Imagine this scenario.
This collector, like every collector, think it's cool to collect holos, reverse holos, EX, ex, Lv. X, Primes, full arts, all that stuff, but something is wrong. That was 2 years ago, when this collector got all those cool holo cards. Now, those holos are all curled up, even in sleeves.
Yeah, that's basically what happens to my holos. They curl up like no tomorrow, and it is driving me insane. Holos just don't look cool when they are all curled up.
DrunkSpinda said:
Im complaining that the Pokemon sets are large and filled with junk. In Magic the majority of cards are playable.
Gust of Wind was also a top 10 card back then as well. I have no idea why it was brought back now considering over the years there was many balanced versions of it.
thealphaturtle said:
I agree that both Hypno laser and Catcher should have been Ace Specs. There just as powerful as them and it makes no sense how you can run so many.
It's really hard to have large pokemon TCG sets because of the way pokemon cards work, there are only a limited number of combinations before cards start to repeat.
I also don't like how there is an attack name, but they do different things and require different energies, or 2 cards with different names, but do exactly the same thing, with a splash of new paint (which is why I am totally against introducing new types with their own energy).
I also don't like how there is an attack name, but they do different things and require different energies, or 2 cards with different names, but do exactly the same thing, with a splash of new paint (which is why I am totally against introducing new types with their own energy).
ExcaliDrose said:
Now let me tell you why this is bullsh*t! At least 60% of MTG sets is crappy rares and tier 2.5/2 stuff. I played competetively mtg for 10 years and I know pretty much what I am talking about!
The only thing I still like more in MTG than in Pokemon is that they actually ban and restrict cards if things get out of hand
ExcaliDrose said:
Now let me tell you why this is bullsh*t! At least 60% of MTG sets is crappy rares and tier 2.5/2 stuff. I played competetively mtg for 10 years and I know pretty much what I am talking about!
The only thing I still like more in MTG than in Pokemon is that they actually ban and restrict cards if things get out of hand
[/quote]
But magic has multiple formats and cards are relevant depending on the respective one. Your forgetting that magic has 5+ formats while Pokemon has 1 and a half (i say draft is a half since its hardly relevent).
Theres a huge difference between some filler and purposely making 95% of the set bad. Its like the RD of Pokemon design 5 cards and call it a day. Theres just no effort in most of what is made.
Teal said:
Yeah, there are tons of ideas there, but it sure isn't translated into the actual product.
Just for fun, TPCI shouldn't announce the cards in a future set that would be fun 