Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

2013-2014 Modified Format?

Status
Not open for further replies.
KazamBolt said:
I guess that's true, but not to go back to this old argument that has been beaten to death, but the competitive player market makes up a very small percentage of the people who buy Pokemon Cards, especially in the target demographic of 14 and under.
Click to expand...

I don't have numbers to back this up, but casual people just buying random packs aren't going to buy very many packs. Especially if they pull utter crap (aka 4 out of 5 boosters nowadays) While the hardcore players are buying their singles online (probably for a ridiculous price) or buying 36 packs in a box (probably online too). I think the real demographic for pokemon is the collectors who don't know what the card game is... thats all I can guess as to why 95% of cards released are unplayable garbage.

I really don't think too many people are just buying pokemon cards on a whim like they did when it was THE COOLEST THING EVAAAR (1999-2000) and the people who do enjoy the cards probably get into the game and realize, hey, I can go to a card shop and get 3 packs for 10, or I can go to wal mart and get 3 for 15 plus tax.
 
khit said:
95% of cards released are unplayable garbage...
Click to expand...

LOL...BURN...:thumb: i'm totally with you on this one...

it just doesn't matter what they rotate, or what will the next format be...

they just keep printing unusable cards, and a few utter-usable cards set after set...they have even stopped reprinting cards from older sets, they'd rather invent ultra rare cards, using the same effects from older cards...
and now the last drop on the cup... the new st2 basic EXs, to just make things even worst....they have basic, st1 and st2 pokes...and now so forth, nobody competively uses anything but BIG basic EXs pokemon...and this is the game we all love...and it's really sad...
 
Last edited:
khit said:
I don't have numbers to back this up, but casual people just buying random packs aren't going to buy very many packs. Especially if they pull utter crap (aka 4 out of 5 boosters nowadays) While the hardcore players are buying their singles online (probably for a ridiculous price) or buying 36 packs in a box (probably online too). I think the real demographic for pokemon is the collectors who don't know what the card game is... thats all I can guess as to why 95% of cards released are unplayable garbage.

I really don't think too many people are just buying pokemon cards on a whim like they did when it was THE COOLEST THING EVAAAR (1999-2000) and the people who do enjoy the cards probably get into the game and realize, hey, I can go to a card shop and get 3 packs for 10, or I can go to wal mart and get 3 for 15 plus tax.
Click to expand...

I'm 100% sure that collectors and people who just flat out like Pokemon cards far outnumber players. And also, not everyone has a local card shop. I have yet to find a card shop within a 30 mile radius of my home that sells Pokemon anything, nor have I found one in my home state that sells singles.
 
Sales of Pokemon cards as "toys" greatly outsells packs to competitive players. Ask your local game store if you have one, and the manager will confirm that Pokemon cards always sell. Regardless of set or the current tournament format. They don't move as quickly in a card shop as Magic, but they are consistent.

Now, Walmart, et al are also the largest movers of Pokemon cards nationally.

From a "heyday" perspective, notice that tournament figures in the US keep going up year over year. The divide between tournament and casual players is fairly consistent. If you don't have kids or are no longer in Elementary / Junior High, it is easy to not see how many kids still just have and trade cards for fun. It is just as popular as it has ever been.

Now, historically, TCPI very much cares about TCG and VGC Barriers of Entry to competitive play and regularly work to improve it. The fact that outside of Tropical Beach, "top" cards this year tended to stay a bit less expensive in the third party market seems to bear out the continued diligence in that regard.

It is very human to feel frustrated with change. From a business perspective, Pokemon has been seeing crazy consistent growth. From a tournament perspective, they are continuing to innovate and things are steadily improving.

Now, on to the actual topic at hand - If you look at the number of legal sets heading into a season, I have felt very confident all year long that there would not be a rotation. Next year, it is quite likely we will get a very deep one. This is of course, just my personal opinion.
 
"nobody competively uses anything but BIG basic EXs pokemon...and this is the game we all love...and it's really sad..."

^
did we forget durant? I know most would say its dead but I have never not hit top while playing it even after TDK releasd. I thought goth won us nats? (though BB did have some wins) I am also a collector and for the most part dont mind some of the unusable cards as sets require every card to be worth the higher end price.
 
Just because 1 person uses Durant doesn't mean it's not dead. It is dead and all the top players recognize that, even Jason K who had a crush on the card. Also Goth won US Nats, and if it weren't for it's main attacker, Mew EX, the deck would not be as strong as it is, so yes, the format is centered around big basic EX Pokemon, and looks like it's not going to change in quite some time.
 
khit said:
I don't have numbers to back this up, but casual people just buying random packs aren't going to buy very many packs.
Click to expand...

No... but they greatly, greatly outnumber "us". My understanding is that it operates something like for every player buying a box of a set, there are a good hundred "random little kids" buying (or having bought for them) a booster pack.

RLKs are also less concerned about pulls; give them something "shiny" or "kewl" and many are happy; this is the market that allows a company to just "dump" a TCG into stores for some quick sales and easy profit... and then let the game die and do it again in a few years. Digimon used to be an example of this, and still is if they plan on relaunching it again. ;)
 
In a conservative estimate, for every Player that purchases a booster box or more of each set at a time, there are about a thousand non-players that purchase one booster pack at a Big Box checkout line a month. Most of the latter group has no idea that the cards are actually part of a game.

My wish is that we could convert just 1% of those non-player purchases into players, but IDK how to do that effectively...
 
bullados said:
In a conservative estimate, for every Player that purchases a booster box or more of each set at a time, there are about a thousand non-players that purchase one booster pack at a Big Box checkout line a month. Most of the latter group has no idea that the cards are actually part of a game.

My wish is that we could convert just 1% of those non-player purchases into players, but IDK how to do that effectively...
Click to expand...

Interesting, I didn't think the company made more money off a couple sales a month as opposed to the dedicated who are buying as much as 100 of the casual fans, but I guess they do :p Well... I don't see why they would change things then... sigh...
Although, thinking about it, in my city of 200,000, there are 4 people at my pokemon league.... so... guess its not as popular as I'd like to believe :(
 
KazamBolt said:
I'm 100% sure that collectors and people who just flat out like Pokemon cards far outnumber players. And also, not everyone has a local card shop. I have yet to find a card shop within a 30 mile radius of my home that sells Pokemon anything, nor have I found one in my home state that sells singles.
Click to expand...

There is one in Ann Arbor

*Edit. They no loner sell singles apparently :/
 
khit said:
Interesting, I didn't think the company made more money off a couple sales a month as opposed to the dedicated who are buying as much as 100 of the casual fans, but I guess they do :p Well... I don't see why they would change things then... sigh...
Although, thinking about it, in my city of 200,000, there are 4 people at my pokemon league.... so... guess its not as popular as I'd like to believe :(
Click to expand...

For the record, I don't think it is just Pokémon either. Just about any "big" TCG (yes, even Magic) makes a substantial amount of money from selling in big stores like Wal-Mart. I mean, do you really think the volume of merchandise going through Wal-Mart plus all the other large retail chains is being bought by the player base... who like us favor buying their own boxes or singles if "serious"?

Organized Play (I believe) is largely about prestige, advertising, and stability.
 
khit said:
Interesting, I didn't think the company made more money off a couple sales a month as opposed to the dedicated who are buying as much as 100 of the casual fans, but I guess they do :p Well... I don't see why they would change things then... sigh...
Although, thinking about it, in my city of 200,000, there are 4 people at my pokemon league.... so... guess its not as popular as I'd like to believe :(
Click to expand...

Well, I mean the ICv2 rankings take into account both the Hobby Channel and the Mass Channel, then they also provide a combined ranking. More often than not, the first 5 in the Combined match the Mass almost exactly. That's where I (and many others) tend to draw our conclusions from.
 
The Pinecone said:
Looks like it's going to be NXD on according to German TO's (they really beat Pokemon to the punch? Why?)
Click to expand...

Because it is impossible to organise tournaments without this information. Nobody wants to wait any longer because it's just stupid. There shouldn't be a reason to keep this a secret for so long.
As mentioned before, it doesn't mean that this will be the next season's format. It's for the German "Arena Cups" (in September).

If there is a reason to keep this a secret, please tell me. I just don't get it.
 
vaporeon said:
There is a huge difference in this format now and the last ex format.
Click to expand...

Yup, and the huge difference is that there was waaaay less net-decking and list sharing back in 2005. A lot of players played bad decks or good decks with horrible lists. That allowed more decks to win, because a lower tier deck that was built well could beat a higher tier deck that is build poorly.
 
psychup2034 said:
Yup, and the huge difference is that there was waaaay less net-decking and list sharing back in 2005. A lot of players played bad decks or good decks with horrible lists. That allowed more decks to win, because a lower tier deck that was built well could beat a higher tier deck that is build poorly.
Click to expand...

No. There was tons of it back then too.
 
It wasn't as easy to get a good, tournament proven list then as it was now, but it wasn't exactly "hard" either: we are talking 2005 not 2001 and earlier. You had less players communicating this information as openly or efficiently, but you still had them doing it. "Deck mechanics" were not a new thing, even ones who were name level players.

Net-decking was less accepted back then, with vocal players insisting it was flat out cheating to get a list from any place but your own head. It still happened quite often as it really is pretty ridiculous not to seek out a list even for an idea you've already come up with, to see if there is no denying it can be improved.

There is also the factor of how players, whether they had a good list or not, will often play something just because it is supposed to be "good"; I believe this has happened in some formats to decrease diversity. Back in 2005 there was enough uncertainty that it wasn't happening. In some earlier formats, even with the lesser exchange of ideas (or perhaps because of it) once an idea was considered "proven", a significant segment of the player base would latch onto it and wouldn't leave until it was proven obsolete.
 
I remember when RockLock was discovered and at some City Championships upwards of 50-60% of players would be running it.

Anyone else remember Chris Fulop's screwed up 9-rounds-of-RockLock tournament report?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top