Realistic Cards: Getting rude lately?

[Guest Supreme Gamesmaster]

[align=center]

It is true' date=' that many create fantastic cards with really bad OCG / Grammar[/align']

 

At which point they stop being fantastic.

 

There are many aspects to a card. Originality is one of them that I have often been attempting to improve recently. OCG is another one (people feel so pressured to create cards with good OCG that they copy/paste bland effects recently, though, so it's a dwindling problem). All of the aspects have to be in balance for a card to be good. Separating sections, or even asking not to be corrected on OCG, is basically asking not to be critiqued at all.

[Huntar!]

I get a little tired of it. I mean, my uniqueness, and balance matter just as much as the OCG and the image.

[SHINI [THE CHAOS]]

I get a little tired of it. I mean' date=' my uniqueness, and balance matter just as much as the OCG and the image.

[/quote']

I disagree and agree, at the same time.

 

Minor OCG problems shouldn't matter in a person's rating. (Unless stated otherwise like 'This card would be a 10/10 if you said *blah blah* differently.)

 

Big OCG problems matter.

[Bloodrun]

Icyblue' date=' do you think the permissions thing could help solve issue with ratings, and stop the rudeness which members feel that realistic cards is suffering from?

[/quote']

 

It could help alot. So yes.

 

And Bloodrun, I know that yes. But its a difference for rudeness... OCG is merely the language of the card, not the core which is what this thread is getting at....

 

let me ask you this

when you post a card, you want people to rate it right, on how they like it and stuff right?

 

OCG is one part correct?

now if the rater decides to add other things to his/her rating, thats there choice

your the one asking for a rate

 

you have no control over what they rate

 

thats like controlling on how someone fills out a survey for a "How well did I serve you" form >_>

[SushiTheLegend]

For the 40th billion friggin time, we aren't bothered if they rate the OCG...we just expect them to have a bit more to comment on than just our OCG, is that too much to ask for? Or have people gotten the concept of OCG stuck so far into their head that they don't know how to rate other things? Seriously we really don't care if you rate our OCG, but can't you rate other things AS WELL, honestly is that too much to ask for, I mean really is it?

[Dark_Pride]

Just rude? Ya think. I think this should stay or even be a sticky because new people must ask before "Correcting" yeah these ""(meaning whatever) why don't they ask? I'll tell you because of the rep thingy. Yeah beware that we won't give your a "Good" rep but a "Negative " one so you better ask newbie before you post. And it's not rude it's humiliating why should they correct it in front of everyone why not by PM' date=' you won't get a good reputation because you'll be called a rude person(I'm still talking about the newbie). Well if you see it from my point you will realize that your not just being bad with the person that made the card but with most of the people because they will just ignore you and won't be loved this way.

[/quote']

 

I feel that I am attacked by your post (Although, I am doing this in the Written Cards Section, not the Realistic Cards Section) . Why do I correct the OCG? It's mainly because there would be many conflicts with a card's effect if the OCG is unclear. For example, a card has this errata:

 

"This card can attack all of your opponent's monsters."

 

At first, there seems to be no conflict with the rulings, but since Yu-Gi-Oh card errata became too literal (best example I know is the case of "Obsidian Dragon" and "Cyber Phoenix"), some players (especially the noobs) would reason that the monster can attack the opponent directly, although it is clear enough to the professionals that it is not possible.

 

Second, the reason why the OCG is fixed first is that every player would comprehend with the rulings of that particular card. If the conflict with such rulings would be removed, then it would be easier to assess whether a certain card is overpowered. Who would assess a card which has errata that is too incomprehensible?

 

I admit that I am not expert in criticizing card effects. Also, as much as possible I do not want my post to be like "This card is good." sort of thing.

 

Finally for those who think that I am doing these for reps, I don't care about reps.

 

Wait Written cards? Um who said we are talking about this, please read the title because it's right. OK lets say you made your best card and added it in the realistic section. OK lets say that it's bad but you don't know.

Comments:

OMG WOW how bad can this get. Look sunny why don't you go read some more cards and see if they match because I can tell you 100% that this card is a joke and will make people laugh until they die and yeah do you know what OCG is? I don't think so because they stink.

OK thats just the start you haven't wrote the end or will write it. You see thats more than rude and I won't say more. And please read the title because we're not saying "Written Cards: Getting rude lately?"

 

Now, let me defend myself. Now let me ask you, is there a difference between the Written Cards Section and the Realistic Cards section aside from having the cards lack pictures and with Realistic Cards having being more active? They share the same rules so they should be technically the same. Also, why does this topic only involves the Realistic Cards Section. Maybe the title of this thread should be changed to "Comments on Cards, Getting Rude Lately?"so that everything would be generalized. Also, please pardon me if I have made such annoying comments. I am trying to be sensible when making a post.

 

Also, I agree with Dj Osiris' Idea of having the thread divided into two sections. The only problem I see is how to enforce this idea and an additional mods.

 

Icyblue' date=' do you think the permissions thing could help solve issue with ratings, and stop the rudeness which members feel that realistic cards is suffering from?

[/quote']

 

No, if noobs can't place proper image credits or disclaimer on their cards, how can they abide by that rule? (You may add that to the rules)

 

EDIT1:Also, I suggest that the name of the sections of the Realistic Cards are the Professional Realistic Cards section and Beginner Realistic Cards Section.

 

EDIT2:If the Written Cards Section becomes more active and the situation becomes worse, then you may consider subdividing it like in the Realistic Cards.

 

I suggest for a 5 testing days for the implementation of the permission rule to evaluate if the rule is effective or not. You may give warnings through PM for those days, then give appropriate measures for the succeding days. Also, the rule should apply to all sections, not just Realistic Cards.

 

I think the sanction that I can think of is deleting the post or giving neg reps for the violators.

[Guest JoshIcy]

@Above: I fail to see how splitting it like that would do it any justice. Like you said>

No' date=' if noobs can't place proper image credits or disclaimer on their cards, how can they abide by that rule? (You may add that to the rules)

[/quote']

 

and not only that, your idea does the same thing just with a different name. Dj's one is more on the laxed end on how much you want to be rated on a certain area..... Some "n00bs" as you called them, even though my thread refers to these members as "newbs" which is the polite term, wouldnt follow by that. Restrictions included..... Sorry lol, your idea is no different that what it normally would be...

[v8561v]

But, if you think well, a card isn't realistic if the effect and OCG suck.

Because on the description of the realistic cards say: post here cards that are balanced and....(sorry, don't remebmer).

So, it means: people MUST learn OCG and effects.Because a card can't be realistic without these terms.For a ''newbie'', we can even be patient and ''teach''.But, if this ''newbie'' doesn't want to hear and continues his crappyness, it should be considered and treated as a real n00b.

[Guest JoshIcy]

this is mainly for those who rate on the ocg and ocg alone >.>..... not the other bits lol, those who rate balance etc generally rate the others so its fine...

[v8561v]

this is mainly for those who rate on the ocg and ocg alone >.>..... not the other bits lol' date=' those who rate balance etc generally rate the others so its fine...

[/quote']

 

No, I'm not saying EXACTLY like that,.By a way, yes, but no.

A card, to be perfect, must have OCG, a nice pic, a good effect (or a good description), a nice name and be balanced.

Got it??A card isn't a card only with OCG or a pic, or balanced stats, only with everithing harmonized.