Potential for a bigger, more legitimate game? (Part 2 finally done!)

[tinox6]

Ok, that's good to know. I was wrong about that That is kind of a weird stat tho...

Then I guess the whole argument of "Masters are your largest consumer demographic and should be listened to" falls apart. I wonder if they are the largest consumer demographic for competitive players? Guess I wont assume they are... haha

 

[yoshi1001]

Ok, that's good to know. I was wrong about that That is kind of a weird stat tho...

It seems strange because you do play the game. Some people really do just like collecting the cards.

 

[Crinus]

People from TPCi have told us on multiple occasions that non-player sales outnumber player sales by several times. I don't know their exact methods, but I have no reason to doubt them. Per capita, I'm sure players spend more (albeit indirectly in some cases when you consider singles sales and other factors), but we're a tiny part of the overall puzzle.

You mean as in people buying product at walmart or target that doesnt play the game?

I blame that on the fact their is a lack of promoting leagues and tournaments for that to happen in the first place, like my league at McDonalds, who the heck is going to know their is a league there for Pokemon? Sure they could go to the Pokemon.com website, and pray you can navigate to the play pokemon section to find out about it, or hope the league search works, 9 times out of 10 I am betting it dont happen or no internet access.

 

[tinox6]

You mean as in people buying product at walmart or target that doesnt play the game?

I blame that on the fact their is a lack of promoting leagues and tournaments for that to happen in the first place, like my league at McDonalds, who the heck is going to know their is a league there for Pokemon? Sure they could go to the Pokemon.com website, and pray you can navigate to the play pokemon section to find out about it, or hope the league search works, 9 times out of 10 I am betting it dont happen or no internet access.

Exactly, which is why I think they should put a URL on the pack redemption codes to link people to the event locator page.

 

[vanderbilt_grad]

We have a staggering lack of Junior players at Premier events compared to Masters. The Juniors are the next generation of players but where are they? Pokemon is supposed to be a "kids" game, so why aren't more kids playing it? And it has nothing to do with having side tournaments for prize money.

Masters is huge because it has the largest range of ages. Many masters also aged up, starting out as Juniors or Seniors, that just kept on playing. IMHO the predominance of masters is less a testament to not attracting juniors but to how well Pokémon can hold onto players as they grow up.

Yes, getting new youngsters to play is a good thing. But pointing to the masters vs juniors ratio isn’t really saying much IMHO. (note I’m a poke-parent who’s boys started playing when they were 7 & 5 respectively)

People from TPCi have told us on multiple occasions that non-player sales outnumber player sales by several times. I don't know their exact methods, but I have no reason to doubt them. Per capita, I'm sure players spend more (albeit indirectly in some cases when you consider singles sales and other factors), but we're a tiny part of the overall puzzle.

The problem with this is that lots of competitive players buy stuff at the big box stores too. I regularly buy tins, blisters, and such there. It’s closer to where I live than my local gaming store … and that local gaming store frequently doesn’t have the boxes, tins, and such. Long story short … I don’t think that TPCi can really tell whom is buying their product. They can say big box stores sales, but they can’t say who those folks are that buy there.

 

[ajwalker]

Masters is huge because it has the largest range of ages. Many masters also aged up, starting out as Juniors or Seniors, that just kept on playing. IMHO the predominance of masters is less a testament to not attracting juniors but to how well Pokémon can hold onto players as they grow up.

Yes, getting new youngsters to play is a good thing. But pointing to the masters vs juniors ratio isn’t really saying much IMHO. (note I’m a poke-parent who’s boys started playing when they were 7 & 5 respectively)

I think the ratio of Junior to Masters does say something. And I, too, am a Pokedad who's son started playing when he was six.

It started at home, then I went on line to find a League but we've gone to City (2x), State (2x) and Regionals (2x) thus far. Not counting all the Battle Roads and every pre-release we could afford.

As a Pokedad, it concerns me to not see the next generation of players. That means the player base is getting older, that means eventually the same player base will start to move on with their lives and have less and less time to play Pokemon. That is a really big potential problem as I see it.

That means TCPi is not doing a very good job at marketing/reaching out to new players if the player base has grown up with the game and have to move into the higher divisions because of age. That should be a concern for anyone who loves the game. That could mean the disproportionate number of Masters to Juniors means there has been very little real "new growth" to the player base.

I'd like to know the ratio of Pokeparents who actually play and those who endure this "phase" of Pokemon for their kid's sake. I would guess those that play have a different level of concern for the overall health of the game than those who simply endure it for the sake of their kids.

---------- Post added 12/07/2011 at 12:04 AM ----------

I talk to parents a lot where I work, parents whose kids often are into Pokemon or even play the Pokemon TCG. Time and time again I've seen parents' faces light up when I tell them what I've accomplished with the game. Usually the response is something like, "Wow, so they CAN do something with this game!" That sentiment disappears when I tell them they can win more packs and maybe a trip if they beat out hundreds of players.

I would say he is doing something with the game: having a lot of fun and meeting a lot of nice people. :thumb:

As a playing Pokedad, I really don't care about the scholarships. They'd be great and all but my son wanted to play and play competitively before we found out about the scholarships. You know what his Pokemon goal is? To have a deck named after him, not win money, not win a scholarship but to have a deck named after him because he is/was the Pokemon Juniors World Champion. That's his only goal, to be the very best. That's his reward. It's not about money or the scholarships. And it's internal instead of external.

Would scholarships help? Sure, especially for the non-playing Pokeparent as a lure. But really, let's be honest, the odds are only slightly better than someone getting a scholarship for sports to a major university. Any parent who is banking on their child winning a scholarship through playing Pokemon is not doing a good job at planning for their child's future education. That's like planning on winning the lottery to pay for your retirement. Usually not a very solid plan.

So what is left? Playing because the game is fun and they enjoy it. Nothing more and nothing less. Any thing you get on the side should be just that, the side.

---------- Post added 12/07/2011 at 12:19 AM ----------

If you can think of another system to improve the game's attention from TPCi to improve either funding or communication, I would love to hear it!

I don't think a separate event schedule would help correct any of the issues you raised in the first part. But I completely agree we need better communication from TCPi that flows both ways.

For those of you guys who just couldn't stand the episode, don't worry! We'll be back to "regular" Prof-It! next week

And I liked the episode, even if I didn't agree with your conclusion. I'm glad someone is talking about the need for more communication with Japan and TCPi. I'd really like to see more thoughtful analysis like that (I mean the first part). Anybody can talk about how they did at a tournament or show matches or open packs, not many people are willing to think critically about where the game is as a whole. :thumb:

 

[eriknance]

I would say he is doing something with the game: having a lot of fun and meeting a lot of nice people. :thumb:

As a playing Pokedad, I really don't care about the scholarships. They'd be great and all but my son wanted to play and play competitively before we found out about the scholarships. You know what his Pokemon goal is? To have a deck named after him, not win money, not win a scholarship but to have a deck named after him because he is/was the Pokemon Juniors World Champion. That's his only goal, to be the very best. That's his reward. It's not about money or the scholarships. And it's internal instead of external.

Would scholarships help? Sure, especially for the non-playing Pokeparent as a lure. But really, let's be honest, the odds are only slightly better than someone getting a scholarship for sports to a major university. Any parent who is banking on their child winning a scholarship through playing Pokemon is not doing a good job at planning for their child's future education. That's like planning on winning the lottery to pay for your retirement. Usually not a very solid plan.

So what is left? Playing because the game is fun and they enjoy it. Nothing more and nothing less. Any thing you get on the side should be just that, the side.

A few points I want to make...

First of all, it's kind of weird that you criticize the reasonable goal of winning a scholarship right after saying that your son's goal is to have a deck named after him. I too want my name on a deck because I won Worlds (oh Steelix you let me down!), but in reality that may never happen. YOU may not care much about scholarships and may have everything planned out for your son, but that's just not the case with everyone. For many parents they see their kids messing around with Pokemon all the time ("Pokemon this, Pokemon that"), and when I tell them that their kid can win a scholarship, they instantly see a purpose for their kid's hobby.

When scholarships are slashed, that argument gets harder and harder to make. The game continues to grow and prize support dwindles as money gets moved here and there. It doesn't sound like you've been playing all that long, but when I started playing (2005-2006) I could reasonably make an argument that a child's involvement with the Pokemon TCG may lead to scholarships. I saw it firsthand when my brother and I designed a deck for someone in the Juniors and he went on to place 3rd (yes, top 4 got scholarships back then). In a smaller field of players with scholarships awarded to the top 4, that was a realistic goal. Now, with a larger player field and no scholarships at all, I can't make that same point.

Also - and I'm not singling you out with this because PLENTY of people have made this argument - Pokemon Organized Play is NOT just about having fun and enjoying the game. The Tournament Rules itself says this in its opening:

As a game of skill, Pokemon is enjoyed for its complex strategies, entertaining characters, and atmosphere of friendly competition. While the objective of a Pokemon tournament is to determine the skill level of each player involved, our ultimate goal is to ensure that every participant has fun. It is this attitude that Pokemon Organized Play wishes to emphasize during Pokemon tournaments.

It's all about balance.

For anyone wanting to emphasize how Pokemon tournaments should only be about fun, it's just not the case. This is ultimate goal of a tournament, but the objective is to find out who in the room is the best player. That's competition. And when players compete, rewards are generally expected (especially since it adds to the legitimacy of the game). And of course, Organized Play has Leagues available for players who only want to have fun.

 

[djjoe227]

A few points I want to make...

First of all, it's kind of weird that you criticize the reasonable goal of winning a scholarship right after saying that your son's goal is to have a deck named after him. I too want my name on a deck because I won Worlds (oh Steelix you let me down!), but in reality that may never happen. YOU may not care much about scholarships and may have everything planned out for your son, but that's just not the case with everyone. For many parents they see their kids messing around with Pokemon all the time ("Pokemon this, Pokemon that"), and when I tell them that their kid can win a scholarship, they instantly see a purpose for their kid's hobby.

I'm just going to single out this section of the post, because it's something I want to build on.

Can you answer the following- Would you make the same case had this been a different game or event?

Let me throw an example** out there that has gotten a lot of discussion recently between myself, coworkers, adults, and friends: Call of Duty. To give you a brief back-story on why this has become a discussion between myself and others, I was purchasing "Sonic Generations" for myself at a local Gamestop the day of release for Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3. While waiting in line to complete my purchase, I overheard "That'll be $124.95" coming from the register, and at that declaration I looked up to see a mother with what seemed to be her 16 year old son (irrelevant) and her 3-4 year old son. The employee handed her two copies of Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3, which she then proceeded to to give to both of her children. As they walked out, the two brothers discussed playing the game, and I can quote the younger one as saying "I'm going kill everyone like a beast".

I bring this example in to make a comparison- while Pokemon can be expensive and time consuming, is it safe to say that Scholarships are a reason to promote a child's enjoyment? I can tell you that Call of Duty does not do that. That's not to say there aren't monetary prizes in a Call of Duty tournament, but to note that a parent will endorse the loss of innocence in their child for Call of Duty. I find it hard to believe that parents do not find a purpose in playing Pokemon while finding a purpose in encouraging the play of games like Call of Duty. While Pokemon might not help "plan a future", I do not believe Call of Duty will do any differently. However, these kind of things still do happen, and frequently.

In short, I do not believe that when it comes to fun a parent's motivation to encourage gameplay of any kind doesn't come from future plans and benefits, but from the overall outcome in terms of enjoyment.


**This discussion isn't limited to Call of Duty, feel free to exchange this with a personal example, as I have, to make my discussion more clear.

 

[ajwalker]

A few points I want to make...

First of all, it's kind of weird that you criticize the reasonable goal of winning a scholarship right after saying that your son's goal is to have a deck named after him. ... YOU may not care much about scholarships and may have everything planned out for your son, but that's just not the case with everyone. For many parents they see their kids messing around with Pokemon all the time ("Pokemon this, Pokemon that"), and when I tell them that their kid can win a scholarship, they instantly see a purpose for their kid's hobby.

Why is it weird that my son wants a different kind of reward than money/scholarships? He wants the prestige or honor of being named the best as any competitive player in anything would want.

And I'm not singling you out, I was merely commenting on the idea of Pokeparents who's eyes light up because they see some scholarship reward as opposed to their child doing something just for the fun of it. We shouldn't have to "argue" to get parents to support something their kids enjoy, it either is or isn't a priority for them and I would argue the money will only attract the most peripheral of support from those same parents.

(P.S. And, for the record, we've been playing competitively for four years but I fail to see what, if anything, that has to do with making your case. Ok, it hasn't been as long as you, but it's certainly been long enough to remember when there were scholarships available.

When they decision came down at the start of this season, my son didn't throw up his cards and say "That's it! I'm done with Pokemon because they stopped offering scholarships!" and neither did I.)

And moreover, why has this discussion, a very needed and vital one, denigrated into discussion about scholarships? We should be trying to brainstorm some ideas that may really work and can be passed on to make the game better on the off chance someone in charge reads this.

 

[MegaVelocibot]

Not trying to be a bother, but the the video, part two, felt very rushed. I would have loved to see a further expansion on the formats mentioned in the first video, especially the point-buy (with ban-list) DP-on format.

 

[CaptainAhab]

I feel that The Top Cut would be a good candidate for running independent tournaments across the nation with a larger community of likeminded individuals.

Furthermore, I have a feeling this game will grow more competitivey as the competition is advertised much more -- especially factors such as its cost and the friendly community coupled with the moderate depth of the game.

 

[eriknance]

Why is it weird that my son wants a different kind of reward than money/scholarships? He wants the prestige or honor of being named the best as any competitive player in anything would want.

I didn't say that your son's goal was weird (in fact, I even agreed with the goal). I said it's weird for you to criticize the idea of winning a scholarship because the odds are so slim right after praising your son's goal of winning Worlds (of which the odds are much slimmer).

And I'm not singling you out, I was merely commenting on the idea of Pokeparents who's eyes light up because they see some scholarship reward as opposed to their child doing something just for the fun of it. We shouldn't have to "argue" to get parents to support something their kids enjoy, it either is or isn't a priority for them and I would argue the money will only attract the most peripheral of support from those same parents.

I don't see why it can't go both ways. There are parents out there like you who only want their children to have fun with the game. I think that's pretty awesome, but from the viewpoint of bringing more players into the game (especially younger players), the "fun" argument doesn't always work. That's where substantial prizes can be more of an incentive for players/parents. (Also, to be sure, I'm totally against parents pressuring their kids to play just so they can win scholarships; it causes expectations that oftentimes can't be met with anything other than disappointment)

(P.S. And, for the record, we've been playing competitively for four years but I fail to see what, if anything, that has to do with making your case. Ok, it hasn't been as long as you, but it's certainly been long enough to remember when there were scholarships available.When they decision came down at the start of this season, my son didn't throw up his cards and say "That's it! I'm done with Pokemon because they stopped offering scholarships!" and neither did I.)

A lot of people don't understand how much prize support has fallen over the years. I just didn't know.

And moreover, why has this discussion, a very needed and vital one, denigrated into discussion about scholarships? We should be trying to brainstorm some ideas that may really work and can be passed on to make the game better on the off chance someone in charge reads this.

I'm not trying to hijack the thread or anything like that. The very first point JWittz made was the "1) interest and funding from the company itself." I think scholarships/prize support weigh heavily in whether or not this game will continue to grow. It's worth noting that prize support was exactly one of the things OP used back in the day to rescue the game from near-death. Also, I agree with some of your earlier sentiments concerning prizes. I think more specialized items can be given out (sort of like the No.1 Trainer Card for winning Worlds). I also don't think Pokemon should be "all about the money," but scholarships/prize support goes a long way in making the case to parents for why their son or daughter's hobby can be useful in the real world. And trust me, I really didn't feel that way for a long time until I started working at a place where I talk on a day-to-day basis with parents about Pokemon and other games.

replies are in bold

---------- Post added 12/07/2011 at 02:32 PM ----------

I'm just going to single out this section of the post, because it's something I want to build on.

Can you answer the following- Would you make the same case had this been a different game or event?

Let me throw an example** out there that has gotten a lot of discussion recently between myself, coworkers, adults, and friends: Call of Duty. To give you a brief back-story on why this has become a discussion between myself and others, I was purchasing "Sonic Generations" for myself at a local Gamestop the day of release for Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3. While waiting in line to complete my purchase, I overheard "That'll be $124.95" coming from the register, and at that declaration I looked up to see a mother with what seemed to be her 16 year old son (irrelevant) and her 3-4 year old son. The employee handed her two copies of Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3, which she then proceeded to to give to both of her children. As they walked out, the two brothers discussed playing the game, and I can quote the younger one as saying "I'm going kill everyone like a beast".

I bring this example in to make a comparison- while Pokemon can be expensive and time consuming, is it safe to say that Scholarships are a reason to promote a child's enjoyment? I can tell you that Call of Duty does not do that. That's not to say there aren't monetary prizes in a Call of Duty tournament, but to note that a parent will endorse the loss of innocence in their child for Call of Duty. I find it hard to believe that parents do not find a purpose in playing Pokemon while finding a purpose in encouraging the play of games like Call of Duty. While Pokemon might not help "plan a future", I do not believe Call of Duty will do any differently. However, these kind of things still do happen, and frequently.

In short, I do not believe that when it comes to fun a parent's motivation to encourage gameplay of any kind doesn't come from future plans and benefits, but from the overall outcome in terms of enjoyment.


**This discussion isn't limited to Call of Duty, feel free to exchange this with a personal example, as I have, to make my discussion more clear.

I only have about 15 minutes before I have to get back to work, so let me see if I can get this right...

A main difference between the Pokemon TCG and Call of Duty is who those products are being marketed to. The Pokemon TCG, as many have said before, is a "kid's game" (heavy emphasis on those quotation marks). Call of Duty isn't marketed to younger kids in the same way the TCG is. But there's still the expectation that being the best at Call of Duty means rewards. I started searching "Call of Duty tournaments" in Google and one of the search suggestions came up as "Call of Duty tournaments for money."

And to me, that's sort of the crux of the argument for greater prize support. Yes, the overall goal of any Pokemon tournament is to have fun, but there are other life lessons that we can teach our youth, such as "If you work really hard and show dedication for something, you will get rewarded." In the midst of controversial topics such as netdecking and luck, it's good to know that hard work and dedication can actually pay off (and not just internally). Awarding someone with trophies, trips, scholarship, whatever makes a tournament win more worthwhile.

This is something that plenty of people do all the time. When children are in high school and find their own interests (basketball, dancing, etc.), we encourage them to strive so that they may get a scholarship to college. If I had been presented with this expectation earlier in life through something like the Pokemon TCG, maybe I too would have been more focused on achieving something special like a scholarship. So to a degree, yes I would make the same case for other games/events, and I'm not alone.

Of course, if burping happened to be your child's expertise, you would be hard-pressed to find an avenue of success for them, haha. So of course there are games and hobbies that won't bring a person much success, but I think it's a great thing to allow kids and young adults to pursue their passions while realizing the benefits that can come from hard work and dedication.

 

[tinox6]

I would be 100% ok with going back to 1 Regional tournament per year, and not having itas a 2 day event, just to save the money to reintroduce scholarships.

 

[GodBlessAmerica]

I would be 100% ok with going back to 1 Regional tournament per year, and not having itas a 2 day event, just to save the money to reintroduce scholarships.

I think I've brought up this point before, but I'll bring it up again

They actually shouldn't be losing money on having Regionals be 2 days, and at first that may sound like it makes no sense. However, remember this; The 2nd day is supposed to be geared towards the VGC. And since they put the VGC on the 2nd day, they don't have to pay money to host the regional championships they normally would separately. Normally, they would have 14 Regional Championships for the TCG, and a set number of regional championships for the VGC, but at different venues and on different dates. Let's not forget that if you've been to a VG Regional Championship before they combined them with the TCG, you will know that it must have costed a lot of money on the TV's the food vendors, the more decorated tables, and flying Nick McCord to every venue. Those events were pretty exciting.

Unless there are terrible business men working at TPCi, there is no reason for them to be losing money. It doesn't make any logical sense when the player base is growing. I understand that it takes a lot of work and money to put together these tournaments, but I have a few suggestions. And the fact that they took over $100,000 from Regional Scholarships, stopped giving out Trophies to winners, cut overall production value in the VGC, and barely give us any info on upcoming tournaments is truly atrocious behavior. The game may be marketed towards kids, but there is no reason they can't advertise leagues to help them get more into the game.

The business model of this game is disrespectful to the players and fans in my opinion. Yu-Gi-oH treats their fans with more support and a lot of the Yu-Gi-oH community is disrespectful and full of poor sportsmanship. Today we see people putting their time and effort into promoting the game themselves. Prime examples being J-Wittz and the people working at The Top Cut.(Pram, Pooka, Crimz, Holton)

I will rant about these types of issues in the game for as long as they remain.

 

[vanderbilt_grad]

And moreover, why has this discussion, a very needed and vital one, denigrated into discussion about scholarships? We should be trying to brainstorm some ideas that may really work and can be passed on to make the game better on the off chance someone in charge reads this.

The discussion did not "denigrated into discussion about scholarships" ... instead folks with literally years of experience as ambassadors of the game were doing the exact thing you wanted. They were talking about how to make the game better. While new ideas are always appreciated it’s also OK to talk about stuff that’s already been tried that happened to work well.

 

[NoPoke]

Pokemon tcg needs a draft format that works.

It can't be too expensive: four packs needs to work
It can't allow pack luck to dominate.
It has to offer a challenge even when the same set is used repeatedly.

You don't get a bigger game by focusing primarily on the tiny percentage of top players.

By removing the entry fee in the USA a barrier to entry was removed and the USA saw strong growth in play. The next barrier to growth is variety. If the play experience is the same or similar each time then players get bored.

Free is a very costly move that isn't without difficulties. Especially once the idea of being entitled to free becomes endemic. IMHO you would only choose a free model for legal or tax reasons given that your goal is a long term future.

 

[TheRolesWePlay]

Seriously I couldn't care less about getting bored if the prize structure makes up for it. Participation just becomes a formality then. The whole 'fun' concept is a pretty strong constraint on the available directions for this game to grow in. I'll have fun after the tournament with the money I make, it's the same reason anyone goes to work right?

Only Pokemon isn't work. It's a hobby, and trying to make it into a competitive field of that nature would cause Pokemon to shrink and die instead of grow and prosper.

 

[baby mario]

If it's just 'work' with no fun factor, then why play Pokemon at all? Plenty of ways to make more money with that time.

 

[Raen]

I actually have to agree with NoPoke about Draft formats; if our sets were actually designed for drafting to some degree, drafts would likely become a VERY, VERY popular format. This would increase pack sales for TPCi, and increase interest in Pokemon, I feel. The thing about draft is that it takes a different skill set than the regular game, so people who can't really compete in one format may do very well in the other.

It would also be FANTASTIC if we could do online drafts on the PTCGO, and buy virtual packs to do drafts with. That would be hugely popular and likely make TPCi an awful lot of money.

 

[Ness]

Part 2 was done just as well as Part 1. Loved it. Great job, Josh.