Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

Fall Regional Prizes Anounced

*Clearly I don't actually know this, but it makes sense, does it not?

No, it doesn't. You're generalizing. I, for example, have bought on average 5-6 boxes per set. Other masters buy boxes, too. I'm not sure where you're pulling your information from, but it's certainly not reliable. Lifelong players? Yes, it's important to support kids and keep the interest alive, but it doesn't mean that they'll stick around any longer than a 16-year old, for example.
 
You should really stop always defending P!P's decisions every single time. They're capable of screwing up.

Regardless of you believe it's a good decision or not, it's OBVIOUS this is going to tick off masters, and it's ridiculous to try to justify
 
Thank you Dav for your post. While we may not agree with every decision you guys have made, I for one appreciate the transparency that you have shown in those two posts.
 
I no longer make it out to events anymore, but I am interested in seeing where TPCi takes the game over the next few years.

This change brings me to a single question. If the younger players age into masters, and realize they won't be getting as much, what stops them from hopping over to MTG? The way I see it, you give the younger players more stuff, but that doesn't mean they will stick with the game forever. They may get attached to the bigger prizes, and hop onto a game like MTG that can provide the bigger prizes, when they get of age.

On the other hand, the masters playing now already have that choice to hop over to MTG and earn the big(ger) prizes, but choose not to. In my opinion, that deserves some recognition.

I'm not sure if young kids can be loyal to anything. One day they might like Pokemon, one day all their friends may be playing Yu-gi-oh. If I had to invest money into an age demographic, I'm not sure if I'd bet on the young'ins.
 
Should I copy/paste YOUR post stating that you would have to move the date so you wont miss a family members recital?
go right ahead, be my guest. had dates been announced and sanctioned for those prereleases? NO!

i was courteous enough to give people a heads-up that though pres were USUALLY on saturdays they were going to be on sundays for that particular set.

i'd have done the same...and HAVE done the same...if the store had a big M:tG or other event scheduled on the saturdays of prerelease weekends, making those dates unavailable for the pre...but how *dare* i adjust my schedule in order to attend my son's concerts when he's been away at music camp for two weeks?! =/
 
The thing is, I don't think that increased travel money for the TOP 4 at Regionals is going to increase the numbers of preteens and kids playing this game. If they want to get more kids INTO the game, they should increase door prizes for Juniors/Seniors at smaller entry level events or leagues. It's obvious that the usual well-preforming juniors, like stated multiple other times in the thread, already go to Nationals (or even qualify for Worlds) every year because they have most likely have parents who are dedicated to the game more than a casual league players/casual player's parents are. And I agree with the fact that they DO need to advertise the TCG more on TV (especially). Getting kids to play in leagues is pretty much the first step for tournament-playing kids. I agree that there should be more kids in this game, but this isn't the way to do it.
 
go right ahead, be my guest. had dates been announced and sanctioned for those prereleases? NO!

i was courteous enough to give people a heads-up that though pres were USUALLY on saturdays they were going to be on sundays for that particular set.

i'd have done the same...and HAVE done the same...if the store had a big M:tG or other event scheduled on the saturdays of prerelease weekends, making those dates unavailable for the pre...but how *dare* i adjust my schedule in order to attend my son's concerts when he's been away at music camp for two weeks?! =/

Really? Someone is complaining because you have a life and can't devote every waking moment to making sure their every poke wants and needs are met? For shame, Doreen......:lol:
OMG I wish ALL prizes would be taken away. Then we'd see who really plays for the love of the game.....:lol: In fact, I'm going to talk with Dave about that tomorrow!
 
Really? Someone is complaining because you have a life and can't devote every waking moment to making sure their every poke wants and needs are met? For shame, Doreen......:lol:
OMG I wish ALL prizes would be taken away. Then we'd see who really plays for the love of the game.....:lol: In fact, I'm going to talk with Dave about that tomorrow!

Ahhhh why can't I find the like button? Oh wait how did I get off Facebook. oops. :)
 
Just wondering if everyone who is upset about this stipend ordeal would be upset if Masters/Seniors got the $500 and the Juniors got nothing.
 
Last edited:
Ryan (Bullados) points out when the same thing I was thinking, it's not even close. When [WotC] eliminated the Masters division, that was clearly the worst moment in Pokemon, hands down.

Old school, Drew & Ryan, and so true.

Some of us still smart from that, and me even more the fact that for two years it was passed off as "Japan's decision", and in the last month before the end of their franchise, admitted otherwise.

Some of us remember Dav and company coming to the rescue and feel grateful.
Some of us remember being excluded and feel like any inequality is starting down the same path.
Some of us feel both at once.
Some of us have no idea what the 15+ ban was about, but have opinions about this change we want to voice.

Guys, keep this in perspective. They didn't cut any prize support from Masters. When you misrepresent or exaggerate the facts, you detract from your legitimate arguments.

There are legitimate arguments, but note that how you argue, like Chris says, is important. And I'll add, approach is important, too. Its cliche, you catch more flies with honey than vinegar. Recommended reading - Dav's posts. Recommended hunting, Biggies thanks.

I am tasked each year with creating and maintaining a fixed budget for the TCG (and now, VG) Organized Play program. In addition, our typical goals are to increase the reach of the program (more events) and to increase the number of players participating in those events.

Total attendance is a reasonably good measure of the overall health of the existing program. Whether we’re being successful in compelling the player base to compete often, in multiple events throughout the season. Unique attendance is a far better measure of year to year growth of the program.

We can disagree or support that reasoning, but you can't type fairer than that post.

Next time something comes up from a TPCi decision where there is a legitimate concern and legitimate argument, let's consider that greed, loving to insult people and lack of thought might not be the most accurate guesses to their motivation. People legitimately wanted to know "why". Well, there we have it, straight form the source.

Speaking for the management, freedom to have a good discussion & argument, without raking people over the coals or being crude is what we want here.

Loved all the posts urging that people hang in there and make reasonable arguments. mosherstomper is worthy of a best "wins the thread by a person not from TPCi" nomination, IMO. Congrats to you all who were in that mode. I hope everyone continuing the discussion will continue like that.

i have NEVER postponed an event. NEVER.

and the 'tank top' TO was not me, either...

I was like, "wait, wasn't that..." and then, "hey, I didn't think that happened there...". You were just painted with the "Whatever happens in SD County is 'mom's responsibility brush, I guess. :nonono: Not from around these parts, I guess.

Ahhhh why can't I find the like button? Oh wait how did I get off Facebook. oops. :)
Probably a link by one of your "friends". That would explain it. BTW, we call it the thanks button here, bro.
 
Why do people assume juniors and seniors that play the tcg buy a lot of packs? Most of the kids in my area(florida) either buy all their cards online OR their parents do it for them. The parents who shell out a lot on this game are usually educated enough to buy the singles of the good cards their kids would need. The loose packs are bought by kids who probably dont know about the game and never will.

On another topic, a good idea to get kids into the game would be to put something in the blister packs advertising the tcg tournaments. Code cards are not really blingy or colorful or anything and kids probably just throw them out. Maybe put some kind of paper in the packs with pokemon on them telling kids to "prepare to battle with their newly bought cards! go to pokemon.com to locate a league/tournament near you and start your journey today!"
 
Supporting certain age group over another age group is 100% going to lose you customers and supporters of this game. It's such a terrible decision. You are not growing the game by losing a lot of players. The reasoning was also terrible, just because some players win more often then otherwise is not fair for players who have never won a regionals or top 4 before. It's extremely hard in Masters and now not even worth the 6 hours + drive to get nothing. Really disappointed with where this game is heading :(. And to greed, I would be completely fine with a balance of money or even no extra money if your going to be bias and choose ANOTHER division over others. It's simply not fair in ANY means.
 
While I feel like I'm a bit late to the party, I am happy to provide a brief explanation of the reasoning behind the decision to add stipends to the Junior and Senior divisions at Regionals.

I am tasked each year with creating and maintaining a fixed budget for the TCG (and now, VG) Organized Play program. In addition, our typical goals are to increase the reach of the program (more events) and to increase the number of players participating in those events.

Total attendance is a reasonably good measure of the overall health of the existing program. Whether we’re being successful in compelling the player base to compete often, in multiple events throughout the season. Unique attendance is a far better measure of year to year growth of the program.

Each year, we announce changes to the program that we feel will be best for the overall, long term health of the Play! Pokémon program. Each year, a subset of our player community is upset by those decisions while at the same time, another subset is happy with those same decisions. Sometimes, we find that ideas that initially appeared as though they would work, don’t. When that has happened, I think we’ve been pretty good about making adjustments and moving forward.

It is very clear to us, and likely to the majority of you, that Pokémon gains new fans while they are still quite young. We see that new Pokémon fans are rarely entering the brand over the age of 11 or 12 years old, and in most cases, much younger than that.

In 2004, our National Championships in the United States was 236 players. In 2012, the Video Game National Championship was larger than that (571 total players) and as we’re all aware, the TCG portion of the event was over 1,500 total players. With 1,003 Masters division players, many of whom were Junior Division players at that 2004 event, we feel that we have made many of the right decisions along the way.

This decision is not unlike many of the other decisions we’ve made over the years. This is a concerted effort to increase participation at the Junior and Senior level. These efforts in the past are in large part why we have a 1,000 Masters National Championships. These efforts are why a good many of you can look back on your past in Pokémon Organized Play with fond memories of playing the game you loved, and winning some neat stuff that made you really happy. We believe this has a profound effect on player retention. We did not take one penny of support away from the Masters division to affect this change, and that was not easy from the standpoint of keeping the budget in line with what is required of me by the company.

If this works the way we hope, then it will most certainly continue. If it doesn’t, we’ll keep trying. Our hope is that in the coming seasons, we’re able to roll out more changes that not only affect the Junior and Senior divisions positively, but also contribute to the satisfaction of the Masters’ division as well.

Thank you,
Professor Dav


I agree with a majority of what has been changed, but also reflect on something that is eliminated based on the Masters stipends- 15-17 year olds.

However, what of those flash-in-the-pan Masters that just aged up and get 2nd in a Regionals? Those 15 year old kids that have been devoted and those parents that support Pokemon, but because of aging up to the next level, are no longer eligible for that stipend. All of the work, all of the testing, all of the determination to play and wanting to be the best they can be in a more aggressive and competitive age group and they just so happen to get 2nd. Those are the kids I am concerned about losing.

Those are the future League Leaders, TOs, Judges that volunteer their time to TPCi and may become disenchanted because of the feeling for lack of support being shown in the tournament process. I can fully understand the older group waning and coming back as truly most of us do. But the early age kids in the Masters lose as well, and some of those cant drive and rely just as much on Parents getting them to events as the Juniors and Seniors.

Was there any consideration for that small group of players? Is the decision more driven towards the lack of of that age bracket (15-17) being successful in Masters? 18+ is fine, but those tweens in our beloved Game always seem ot fall through the cracks and that is when numbers fall off.
 
Back
Top