Prize support is disappointing
- Thread starter jeffrey123
- Start date
- Status
jeffrey123
New Member
Yes. I played for 2 days. Mentally and physically, that is taxing. I deserve something better than what I got, especially when I am technically better than 900+ of the players in the tournament. When I say better, I mean I ranked better, not that I "am better" (since that's opinion anyway)
I've been watching this thread for awhile, not sure if I wanted to jump in or not (simply because this question pops up all the time). Here's my take on it though:
I work at a place that helps kids and adults with social challenges. During the course of the time I've worked there, I've had many discussions with parents whose children play the Pokemon TCG. Usually, when I tell them of the success my brother and I have had with the game (scholarships, trips), the response is something like, "Wow! So they can actually do something with their hobby, that's amazing!" If I told them they could win money, the response would probably be the same, but of course a scholarship seems "more productive" socially than does a heap of cash.
During this discussion, there's usually the sentiment that "the child spends too much time playing Pokemon," and that "if they can earn scholarships, that justifies the time they spend on it." This argument — that working hard at something can eventually lead to success — is not just a marketing gimmick, it's a major principle that I think everyone should entertain. Let's show our kids that they can be successful in life if they work hard, that they can pursue the things they have a passion for and reap a reward.
This argument has been harder and harder for me to make over the years. As more players enter the game and prize support is "redistributed," it's more difficult for me to stare a parent in the face and say, "Yeah, your child can [DEL]win[/DEL] earn a scholarship." As a result, this discussion never takes place and kids look like they're just having fun. Please note, I'm not arguing that kids should only think of Pokemon in terms of what they can earn. I know there are two sides to that argument, and I believe there's a healthy balance in the middle. The objective of any Pokemon tournament, after all, is to gauge the skill level of each player. And while this is true, the overall goal is to make sure everyone has fun. See the balance there?
More than anything else, I think the Pokemon TCG offers many "life lessons" that anyone can benefit from. These are listed clearly as the tenets of "Spirit of the Game." I like to think that working hard at the Pokemon TCG can actually lead to a material reward. Since there actually is prize support, it's clear that TPC would agree with this sentiment. However, since I've been playing this game it's been clear that the current business model agrees with that only partly. Think about it this way...
What we have seen is a cut in prize support, that's clear. This doesn't mean that money's being taken away, just that it's being redistributed. What many people take for granted, for example, is the support that has been given to Pokemon players internationally. No scholarships for Regionals might very well mean support for the game in other ways as well. I'm not the person to ask when it comes to their budget, but we've heard from the "higher-ups" that the budget is fixed, we've seen some changes in how the game's managed, we've seen certain ideas come and go. What this points to clearly is that the current business model is set to promote growth of the game. This is something every player should desire, even though it still sucks to get top 32 and go home with nothing more than packs. You might not win a scholarship at Regionals, but in a few years you might; the main thing to realize is that this redistribution will guarantee that the game is still around when that happens.
There are, however, some very real solutions to this issue that I think P!P should consider (and some they already have):
- First, Championship Points. Let's give credit where it's due. Even if you're not a fan of CPs, there are plenty of people who finished in the top cut that were. Instead of walking away with "just packs" they walked away potentially with an invitation to the World Championships. That's significant, and it's something that the ratings-based system wasn't as efficient at providing.
- Second, I think that exclusive "stamped" cards for those who make the top cut is cost-effective and desirable by the players. It's done at Worlds, so what's stopping them from doing it at Nationals?
- Third, the issue of "prestige." My brother finished 2nd at Nationals this year and was interviewed/recorded multiple times by The Top Cut. It makes a person feel good, so I definitely think P!P should reexamine how they handled live streaming from now on, and give those websites/players a boost where needed.
- Fourth, entry fees for masters. I'm not opposed to this. Cost me hundreds of dollars to go to Nationals this year even though my brother won us a trip to Indiana. What's another $5?
Note: This all comes from a player who finished top 32 and went home with 18 packs and a hat. My brother finished 2nd, but I won't be able to accompany him at Worlds because I don't have the money. I'll only complain about Hawaii as a location because — and international players correct me if I'm wrong — it's harder for people on the east side of the US and most other countries to get to than, say, Florida. I'm trying to think of everyone involved, not just myself.
TL;DR — go back and read, I feel it's worth it.
Last edited:
GodBlessAmerica
New Member
Thanks Kettler for backing me up there
And Nance, that was a great post. Provides a rather non-biased approach to the situation, viewing the subject from two different perspectives.
I still don't think they're handling the prize support well. And hear me out before calling me selfish and disrespectful.
When you count up the amount of scholarship money that has been taken away this year, just from regionals, it comes to $112,500. When you try to make the argument that the made Regionals two days, I'll counter it with the fact that they included the Video Game Championships in there as well. That means that they didn't have to pay to hold said tournaments at other venues. They probably could have gotten a better deal by doing it in the same weekend and with the same venue. Also, for those that have been to the former video game regional championships, before they were held on the same weekend as the TCG, you will remember that the events were a lot more exciting. TVs broadcasting the matches, mascots like pikachu walking around, and other things going on to please the participants and viewers. Flash forward to the current VGC regionals and you will notice that it is very boring. Not decorations, no excitement, no mascots, no TVs. Just tables. No top cut. It actually looks depressing when comparing it to the past.
So, with all that said, how could the money have been re-distributed? That is a lot of money, and it isn't like extra regionals were made. They just split them into two different dates. If the budget is frozen and they need to save money, why don't they put worlds in a location that isn't ridiculously expensive? There are so many things that are negative that can be said. And we aren't pointing them out because we're spoiled, we are pointing them out because if we say nothing then there is no chance that they will change the things that are wrong. I'm sure they aren't greedy monsters filling their pockets, but if they take some suggestions from their customers and establish a clear line of communication between the two parties, things may change for the better. If anything I think we deserve to hear from them once in a while about the state of the game
King Piplup
Active Member
Oh, you're at least partially right behind my reason for posting that. But the fact of that matter is that without support enticing the Juniors and Seniors, the game will die out. Period.
I agree, Juniors do not look at the significance of the Scholarships as much as they do the boxes of card's they get, but one of the few reasons parents tend to support their kids playing are those scholarships.
And let's face it-If the Junior and Senior divisions (Pokemon's intended audience) died out, there would likely be no OP to begin with.
Taking prize support from the younger divisions is not the way to solve problems. Call me biased (I am to an extent), but it doesn't change the facts.
I agree with the main thrust of this thread-Prize Support in Masters T32-128 needs to be scaled up somewhat. At the Sr/Jr level, T64 is nothing to get really excited over, and that's a fact.
I T64'd and walked away with nothing but my 3 CP (Which I can't complain too much about since it locked my invite so I didn't have to fret all weekend) was fine with me, because frankly, in Seniors, it's not that great. At the scaled down 9(?) packs I would've gotten if prize support was scaled perfectly, I would've preferred a stamped promo. That's enough about Seniors though since I know most of you don't care about them.
Anyway, I agree-Masters prizes should be increased out to T128 (256 if we're pushing for next year?), and while taking prizes from the lower age groups is a really bad idea, there isn't a need to increase prizes at that level.
JMHO.
Cyrus said:
I didn't call him a terrible human. :tounge:. I reserve that for more extreme cases :lol:.
@GodBlessAmerica-Sorry if you thought my post was harsh, I really just can't get over how many masters would outright eliminate prizes at the Jr/Sr level if it meant more for them. (Not saying you think that, just saying a lot of masters do)
K2theAblaM
New Member
I've said it before, but a Stamped Promo (Finalist, Semi finalist, Quarter Finalist, etc) would mean SOOOOOO much to everyone. It doesn't even have to be a great card like Tropical whatever... just a distinguished collectible card that can only be earned through performance at Nats or through trade.
When I went to nats in las Vegas for wow this past June the top 96 promo was a full art card that regular version went for 200 a piece. That costs the company virtually nothing to print one sheet. Attendance was presumed to be very low. It actually beat last years attendance just for the promo so I will agree that giving a good stamped promo will be a good step ahead.
Bolt
New Member
To clarify (not that I am an expert on the matter), you're comparing two different events - the Video Game Showdown was a fairly limited tournament series that happened before the video games got a dedicated OP system.
Regarding Erik's post - I can appreciate the perspective there, I work with kids myself as a gymnastics instructor. It's an indescribable, rewarding feeling to watch a child accomplish something they've worked so hard to achieve. I agree that while the redistribution (I like that word more than decline as well) hurts individuals here in the US, the benefits are more widespread than the immediate future can show us. Forget about seeing greater widespread prize support in the future - I'd be glad just to see this game last a very long time.
Regarding my own earlier post - I want to clarify. I'm not saying that trying to win a scholarship is incorrect. What I meant is that there will always be far more practical ways of earning scholarships than playing Pokemon, and I don't PERSONALLY feel that a change in prize support should deter you from the game if you really enjoy it. Of course you might hit a point where playing isn't financially viable - that's going to be the case with ANY hobby...but this isn't Poker. There aren't high stakes tables where you can catch a $10K upswing at the end of a game. If you're investing time, energy and money into Pokemon for the purpose of winning money back, you should know that there are flat-out better investments to look into.
I haven't won a scholarship since 2007. I'm still in the game because it gives me a reason to travel all over the country, meet a ton of new people (I've met a few of my closest friends playing this game, as I'm sure many others have) and even recently I've gotten to give back to the game in the hope that others continue to enjoy it as much as I do.
ChaosJim
Member
After page 2 the thread got a little tl;dr for me.
That being said: printing exclusive cards is like printing money. A booster pack costs us players more than it does for Pokémon to print, obviously. It would seem that effect is magnified when they hand out a "Top Thirty-Two" card, like at World Championships. We see the main arm of Pokémon using this effect when they reprint Cheren, Bianca, and Landorus as full art cards.
Top 64 got a few Championship Points, and honestly if I had earned those and gotten a Worlds invite as a result, I'd be perfectly happy: because I had been playing all year trying to earn one. Diaz and I have for years discussed the problem as, "All year long you have a good season, in the hopes of having to win one less game at US Nationals to secure a Worlds invite. Maybe 2." Not to get off topic, but 32 people get prizes for finishing in Top 64 per age group. For most of them, those CP are totally meaningless. They might be better off with Call of Legend boosters mailed to their door September 1st.
I wish I knew someone who mattered read Cyurs's, Erik's, Bolt's, and even Diaz's (terse as it was) posts in here. Between them and myself we're probably looking at over 30 years of playing this game. These are the people who want the game to make it to a 30th anniversary.
One of my friends recently described a potential problem for the future, that for many getting a Worlds invite might just become financially unfeasible, not just unprofitable. I wonder if the player base is in fact damaged by such a sentiment, do we create a gulf between the top tier, financially stable players, and the 'just playing for fun' crowd?
That being said: printing exclusive cards is like printing money. A booster pack costs us players more than it does for Pokémon to print, obviously. It would seem that effect is magnified when they hand out a "Top Thirty-Two" card, like at World Championships. We see the main arm of Pokémon using this effect when they reprint Cheren, Bianca, and Landorus as full art cards.
Top 64 got a few Championship Points, and honestly if I had earned those and gotten a Worlds invite as a result, I'd be perfectly happy: because I had been playing all year trying to earn one. Diaz and I have for years discussed the problem as, "All year long you have a good season, in the hopes of having to win one less game at US Nationals to secure a Worlds invite. Maybe 2." Not to get off topic, but 32 people get prizes for finishing in Top 64 per age group. For most of them, those CP are totally meaningless. They might be better off with Call of Legend boosters mailed to their door September 1st.
I wish I knew someone who mattered read Cyurs's, Erik's, Bolt's, and even Diaz's (terse as it was) posts in here. Between them and myself we're probably looking at over 30 years of playing this game. These are the people who want the game to make it to a 30th anniversary.
One of my friends recently described a potential problem for the future, that for many getting a Worlds invite might just become financially unfeasible, not just unprofitable. I wonder if the player base is in fact damaged by such a sentiment, do we create a gulf between the top tier, financially stable players, and the 'just playing for fun' crowd?
FirestormXVI
Member
He's not. Showdown was in 2008. VGC's have had regionals that had similar effort spent on them as US Nationals in 2009, 2010, and 2011. There were 6 regionals as opposed to 15 though and they were run by TPCi rather than the individual PTOs.
And yeah, I'm not sure how much room TCG players have to complain when the VGC Worlds winner gets 3.5k scholarship with 2nd getting 1.5k and nobody else winding up with anything more than worlds swag (which is usually TCG-focused) =P
Also, I'm someone who personally thinks the Seniors division should either be absorbed into Juniors or expanded (up to 18 years of age maybe) but suggesting they drop support for lower divisions is ridiculous. Kids want a prize just as much as the rest of us. And if you've noticed their marketing from Worlds and Nationals, TPCi likes to pretend that the Masters don't exist at all (which I think is a big mistake). They're never going to go with that. You are playing a children's card / video game. They are not going to stop rewarding the children who play it and they shouldn't.
FirestormXVI
Member
Definitely. It's just very discouraging to see the TCG Nationals winners in the US get a higher prize payout than the Worlds VGC winners!
jeffrey123
New Member
Keep in mind that the TCG is much more competitive in terms of player base than VGC. There's 1000 players at US TCG Nationals for masters, maybe 100? for VGC.
Prodigiosus
New Member
Eh, that's not necessarily true. We had 1,000+ at the Newark Regionals in 2010 and averaged around 500+ combined in all divisions back in '10/'11. Numbers were considerably lower this year but at Philly we still had 500+ players (300+ Masters, 180~ Seniors, 80~ Juniors). We did have way less at Nationals though.
bullados
<a href="http://pokegym.net/forums/showthread.php?
Never confuse numbers for competitiveness. The Top Cut held an 8 person tourney at Worlds last year. Would you rather face that field, or any random Regional field? I'd take the Regional field every day and twice on Sunday.
jeffrey123
New Member
Not my point. There aren't very many excellent vgc players like there are tcg players. You face them in cut as well, or even like top 8 which is better
RetiredRocketZapdos6669
New Member
i thought vgc was harder based on the knowledge of the game and it's kinda like poker when you going up to certain comps. To me tcg is alot straight foward in deck comp you play against and possible variation you play. But for vgc i would have to say it's harder to predict upcoming move set even through there is a slim skill set people use. That's just me though =( don't yell at me.
ChaosJim
Member
Please don't derail the thread with comparisons between the VGC and the TCG.
I think the idea of scaling needs to play a role too. Winning a 250 person State Championship is more impressive than winning a 16 person one. I don't think someone should be punished for living in an area with fewer active players, but at the same time players should be rewarded for their added success and dedication to make it through many (or even many many) additional rounds.
I think the idea of scaling needs to play a role too. Winning a 250 person State Championship is more impressive than winning a 16 person one. I don't think someone should be punished for living in an area with fewer active players, but at the same time players should be rewarded for their added success and dedication to make it through many (or even many many) additional rounds.
- Status