Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I suppose ease of gameplay and definitely the support from Bandai are big pros. On my end, the cost to play relative to the big games and even the risky MetaX was the biggest factor.
 

58 minutes ago, Artificial Human said:

Pan Z happened after Retro had 4+ years of fan based build up and the Battle of Gods movie happened. Pan Z was very much an opportunistic move on Panini's part. Also remember that Premier was nothing but 'Best of Score Z' in a new template, with some slight alterations for 'balance'.

I don't disagree with anything here but was there a right time to do the game? Or are you saying that from the position that it was a cash grab and nothing more? Would you say Super's doing the same thing by capitalizing on the property even going so far as kicking Pan Z to the side which was technically successful (unless Panini bowed out on their own)?
 

32 minutes ago, Card Slinger J said:

I don't understand why Bandai felt the need to discontinue the Naruto CCG in Japan years ago with the English version releasing their own expansions for it when it ended up doing more harm than good for the game overall. I can see a similar situation happen to the Dragon Ball Super CCG If they decide to pull the plug on it in Japan with the game continuing to stay in circulation through English exclusive releases.

The reason why Bandai's last attempt at a Dragon Ball CCG failed was because it was designed to be a Naruto CCG clone that was backwards compatible. Not to mention that the gameplay mechanics were too generic compared to the vast improvements made within the Dragon Ball Super CCG that enables it to stand out on it's own compared to it's predecessor.

Hopefully Bandai isn't stupid enough to pull the plug if such sales figures continue. They really just need to stop the exclusive promos to be the perfect game/business model bar bad card design.

I don't know if their Dragon Ball game died solely because it was a Naruto clone. Granted I also don't know how well the game was doing outside my area for the first four sets, but that's pretty successful compared to their card games that died in 1-2 sets. Set 5 really turned the game around for the better, but the production delays and whatnot really turned people off. I was disappointed that it died, but set 5 was really a good set to go out on if I look on the bright side. That level of card design needed to be in set 1. Otherwise I think it was a more balanced Naruto at its core. Plus it was the first English card game to give us Z Gogeta.

It annoyed me that the last set of Naruto was shilling a game over the original anime art we've been getting. Not to mention their own version of Assisted Kamehameha as far as cash grabs go to sell the final set.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mysterious Youth said:

Hopefully Bandai isn't stupid enough to pull the plug if such sales figures continue. They really just need to stop the exclusive promos to be the perfect game/business model bar bad card design.

I don't know if their Dragon Ball game died solely because it was a Naruto clone. Granted I also don't know how well the game was doing outside my area for the first four sets, but that's pretty successful compared to their card games that died in 1-2 sets. Set 5 really turned the game around for the better, but the production delays and whatnot really turned people off. I was disappointed that it died, but set 5 was really a good set to go out on if I look on the bright side. That level of card design needed to be in set 1. Otherwise I think it was a more balanced Naruto at its core. Plus it was the first English card game to give us Z Gogeta.

It annoyed me that the last set of Naruto was shilling a game over the original anime art we've been getting. Not to mention their own version of Assisted Kamehameha as far as cash grabs go to sell the final set.

I remember trying out the last Dragon Ball CCG Bandai released back in 2008 before Playoff/Donruss acquired the Dragon Ball license from them shortly after Bleach TCG died. I didn't really care for it compared to the original Score version due to how the gameplay mechanics didn't capture the spirit of the original source material like Pokémon TCG did. I feel as though the Living Card Game distribution model is trying to remedy this in some way without over saturating the Secondary Market like what Trading Card Game / Collectible Card Games are popularly known for.

It's hard to design a Trading Card Game / Collectible Card Game nowadays that captures the spirit of the source material it's based on since generic gameplay mechanics apparently helps sell more product than one's that don't which could explain why Panini Z / FanZ failed to reinvigorate nostalgia from the Retro Z era. That's why you see so many clones of various Trading Card Games / Collectible Card Games that are able to get around these types of loopholes in Japan so that they can avoid copyright issues here in the States.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Card Slinger J said:

I don't understand why Bandai felt the need to discontinue the Naruto CCG in Japan years ago with the English version releasing their own expansions for it when it ended up doing more harm than good for the game overall.

I can see a similar situation happen to the Dragon Ball Super CCG If they decide to pull the plug on it in Japan with the game continuing to stay in circulation through English exclusive releases.

The game died in Japan last year. The English game is a mod of the same engine and using some of the same art, but isn't the same game.

 

It's the Pan Z to Japan's Score Z, if that makes sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Artificial Human said:

The game died in Japan last year. The English game is a mod of the same engine and using some of the same art, but isn't the same game.

 

It's the Pan Z to Japan's Score Z, if that makes sense.

The English game proves my theory that what they're doing is exactly the same thing they did with Naruto CCG. First few sets are directly designed by the R&D team by Bandai in Japan only to leave the rest to the U.S. shortly after before the power creep starts setting in. Somehow Naruto CCG managed to survive within the later parts of Shippuden which I was already out of the game by then yet the damage was already done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mysterious Youth said:

I don't disagree with anything here but was there a right time to do the game? Or are you saying that from the position that it was a cash grab and nothing more? Would you say Super's doing the same thing by capitalizing on the property even going so far as kicking Pan Z to the side which was technically successful (unless Panini bowed out on their own)?

The problem isn't what they did, but how they did it. 'Hey, there is a market for this still' isn't the problem by itself, but it being the sole purpose of making the product is. The intention was never to make a quality product built off something that still has an audience, but a cheap cash in. If this wasn't the case, the game would have never looked the way it did. The entirety of the rarity system would have been handled differently and the card design would be a lot more precise, like GT.

Bandai shows actual effort. They know there is a market for DBZ and it's exploded, they are also doing right by it from what we've experienced.

 

32 minutes ago, Card Slinger J said:

It's hard to design a Trading Card Game / Collectible Card Game nowadays that captures the spirit of the source material it's based on since generic gameplay mechanics apparently helps sell more product than one's that don't which could explain why Panini Z / FanZ failed to reinvigorate nostalgia from the Retro Z era. That's why you see so many clones of various Trading Card Games / Collectible Card Games that are able to get around these types of loopholes in Japan so they can avoid copyright issues here in the States.

I'm not sure that's entirely true. DBZ had a combination of problems rooting from Score's reputation as a broken mess and the lack of publicity. Games that aren't the big three usually do well when the Big Three falter, DBZ also didn't have that benefit. Super has none of these problems. It's new, it's been publicised and it probably benefits from the maelstrom of Vanguard becoming expensive, Magic's shit show is just starting to end, YGO's Link turned people off, Pan Z's death and Force of Will being a shit show for some 3 sets now, making dumb choices that make Panini look competent. Final Fantasy didn't really become much of a thing, which helps. Anything else out, including Meta X, is too niche or has a different audience like SWDestiny.

I frankly don't think the audience can keep more than the big three and one to two tertiary games alive at once.

 

20 minutes ago, Card Slinger J said:

The English game proves my theory that what they're doing is exactly the same thing they did with Naruto CCG. First few sets are directly designed by the R&D team by Bandai in Japan only to leave the rest to the U.S. shortly after before the power creep starts setting in. Somehow Naruto CCG managed to survive within the later parts of Shippuden which I was already out of the game by then yet the damage was already done.

Naruto died here during Set 2. I am curious on this story of it leaving Japan R&D for America.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Artificial Human said:

I'm not sure that's entirely true. DBZ had a combination of problems rooting from Score's reputation as a broken mess and the lack of publicity. Games that aren't the big three usually do well when the Big Three falter, DBZ also didn't have that benefit. Super has none of these problems. It's new, it's been publicised and it probably benefits from the maelstrom of Vanguard becoming expensive, Magic's shit show is just starting to end, YGO's Link turned people off, Pan Z's death and Force of Will being a shit show for some 3 sets now, making dumb choices that make Panini look competent. Final Fantasy didn't really become much of a thing, which helps. Anything else out, including Meta X, is too niche or has a different audience like SWDestiny.

I frankly don't think the audience can keep more than the big three and one to two tertiary games alive at once.

Dragon Ball Super CCG is taking in the demographic of players who used to play Buddyfight not Vanguard since it's still the go to Yu-Gi-Oh! alternative without breaking the bank. Rumor has it that Force of Will TCG is getting in on the popularity of MTG's EDH/Commander format so it'd be interesting to see If anything comes of it unless it ends of flopping like Tiny Leaders did.

As for your argument about the Big Three and one to two tertiary games, like I said before the Secondary Market for Trading Card Games / Collectible Card Games has gotten too big for any sort of sustainability for these games. It's why we have the Living Card Game business model to help offset the amount of games getting squeezed out from staying in production as Trading Card Games / Collectible Card Games.

1 hour ago, Artificial Human said:

Naruto died here during Set 2. I am curious on this story of it leaving Japan R&D for America.

I don't remember Naruto CCG getting discontinued in Japan with Set 2 Coils of the Snake.

If my memory serves me correctly it happened around the time Set 5 Dream Legacy was the last expansion that Bandai of Japan worked on for Naruto CCG shortly before Set 6 Eternal Rivalry was released. Soon after I started to notice the difference in quality between the cards from those expansions. In fact the Bandai forums for Naruto CCG even admitted that starting with Eternal Rivalry all cards were going to be designed in the U.S.

Bandai of America from my understanding even started releasing English exclusive promos for the game through issues of Shonen Jump while it was still in circulation with Tragic Name Gaara being the most popular one due to his broken interaction with Ino, Shikamaru, and Choji from Eternal Rivalry and Sexy Jutsu from Set 3 Curse of the Sand. Having played against that combo I know full well how broken it was since my choices were limited to help counter it back then given what was available in the game's card pool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is an aside, but does anyone else just really god damn love it when card gamers talk about comboes from old games they used to really enjoy?
Not being a shit or anything, genuinely one of the reasons why I frequent this forum so consistently xD

Also, I don't know if I'd argue that Vanguard is in the big three. The big three, insofar as I've experienced, are generally Pokemon, Magic and Yu-Gi-Oh!. Time will tell how badly Link has damaged Yu-Gi-Oh! since they actually had some record breaking numbers in the last year for player participation, but it has undeniably soured the fandom quite considerably. Vanguard is more of a secondary niche market, especially in the West, where it is generally considered an alternative to Yu-Gi-Oh. It's got a bit more presence in America, but Australia and the majority of Europe are still mostly unfamiliar with the game, while Pokemon is receptive of incredible turn-outs, insane support from the parent company and player-bases in pretty much any country you'll find the others.

This all said, I will say that I don't think PanZ was a cash crab by any means. It's a bit late to weigh in on that one, and I won't deny that there were a lot of problems in managing it, but how they responded to the games cancellation, and the fact that several members of the original team have continued on in an environment where there is NO hope for financial growth (in fact, now costing them money as they organize events and prizes), belies that there were at least a considerable number of people who were genuine fans of either ScoreZ or GT. Or both. Rather than it being a cash crab, I would say that the game struggled from creative differences within the design department. I'd also argue that this is why the early sets of the game were so concentrated on reviving older cards; The fans of the original game had a vision that was going to build off the original game, while the overall company was a company, and just wanted revenue. In effect, it wouldn't be a stretch to call it a sanctioned mod of the originals with the goal of fixing what were their personally perceived issues with them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't mean to imply VG is part of the big 3, it's not, just that it benefited from YGO's problems a few years back.

On the topic of Pan Z, H&V onwards doesn't have terribly many remakes or re-imaginings. Gold Titles dried up by Evolution. What the game is right now was what it was from 2012 in a healthier form, complete with broken or trash fan cards with nothing in-between and fan run tournaments, before Pan Z happened. All Fan Z really did vs Retro Z was solidify a team and make them well known. The development team also don't really mirror what corporate want, nor who decided to resurrect it for whatever reason. They just follow orders. I really don't think it's a coincidence that;

>Premier had really obvious loopholes and power imbalances that should have been noticed had any playtesting had been done.
>Nothing was done with the Big 3, Ginyu, Piccolo and Promo Krillin, two of which are from Premier, which had 4 print runs due to demand.
>The game was complete weak sauce/balanced outside of the Big 3 until Perfection, the first set following IC Cardass in Japan.
>The final set reinstated the original UR scarcity of Premier.

:/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't feel like quoting these big posts.

Regarding Naruto, it was set 6 in America where we got cards specifically designed for use in the English card game. That was a mess when it came to rulings and broken-ness. I want to say that there are sets where they found their groove and sets where an old man threw off their groove. It was a learning process for them as more sets came out. Their team eventually got as small as Panini's with one guy doing most of the work and I know he was trying.

Card Slinger J, I'll agree that Bandai's Dragon Ball game didn't capture the spirit of the show, but I still liked the game and played it as a modded Naruto game that happened to feature Dragon Ball. With the lack of the old days where tons of anime got card games whether they deserve it or not, I don't think it's the M.O. of modern license-based TCGs/CCGs to base a game on a show. Japan especially with games like Miracle Battle and Weiss Schwarz.

Artificial Human, It looks like what you're saying is that both Panini and Bandai were trying to capitalize, but Panini didn't put in the effort Bandai seems to be. I'll agree with that. However, I don't think Panini would've handled the rarity system better if they cared more unless corporate told them to. I look at MetaX doing the same old garbage as any other card game where you need several boxes to attempt playsets of rares and still be far off from DRs/URs. You'd think they'd make sealed product more attractive on such a risky and untested venture. Card design on the other hand... If they had more resources or actual hires, they might've done better. There's just so many times where I'm frustrated at cards that needed a buff or cards that made me question what they were thinking. I'll agree that Awakening was way too obvious with its cash grab qualities.

Denithan, I like your take as well. However, I do think it's a cash grab to some extent despite the positives I can't say there was no effort put into bringing the game back. The introduction of critical effects,  how allies worked, etc. were vast improvements on the original game. However, whether it was lack of manpower or laziness, it was clear that playtesting was not a regular thing for them. That and each style being designed by different people really didn't make the cards themselves very cohesive. It's not a terrible idea to do styles that way but the disparity between certain styles and MPs when it came to playability was really apparent. We needed a certain quality of card design across the board.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, 

 

If I were to hypothetically say I had seen something from set 10 that I couldn't share, but it takes an existing fun loving, but not great, MP to (if I'm correct) a top tier contender of an MP. Would this be a good or bad thing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Set 10 launches 15th of November. Has the Supreme Kai as an MP. Apparently a prior mechanic is being expanded on greatly and supposedly keyworded.

The posts on Retro seemingly imply it's something from Re-Z. Lots of guesses it's refocusing, using attacks to Block. Given that Blocks can be dead cards, this isn't the worst idea. I kinda like it. But the original post hinted it might be everyone errata-ed with a Race for Heritage cards. If this is the case, I expect open Namekian and Saiyan Masteries with race locked RUBO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/17/2017 at 9:33 PM, Denithan said:


 Sound familiar? Because that's kind of FanZ's model at current, where they're terrible about telling us about upcoming events, about new promos, about deck lists, etc. and the bulk of the hype around the game is very much dictated by the number of card reveals we're receiving at a given time.

As somebody who wants to keep playing FanZ, this is my biggest gripe with it.  They made "The Dead Zone" blog and they barely use it.  I know they have their own lives and stuff, but how much time can it take to post a quick blog with the winning decklists?  Seeing what has been winning and what I need to prepare for hypes me up for sure.  Making a blog post about tournament info would be VERY quick; they can't tell me they are too busy to do at least that.  They took way too long this season to get the info up.  I know these things have to be organized and all, but still.  If I am to make travel plans to go to these things, I need to know well in advance.  I am nerd enough to fly out JUST for these, but not if the ticket prices are going to melt my face because I am ordering them last minute. 

At least they posted GenCon.  Maybe I'm just butt mad that they didn't post East Kai because I wanted to see the rage and tears when people saw my Orange Adept Gohan decklist. 

It was going to be hilarious. : (

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, sh0ryu_repp4 said:

when ARE they making the set 10 announcement? the posted "soon" like two days ago...

 

On 9/27/2017 at 4:38 PM, Artificial Human said:

Set 10 launches 15th of November. Has the Supreme Kai as an MP. Apparently a prior mechanic is being expanded on greatly and supposedly keyworded.

The posts on Retro seemingly imply it's something from Re-Z. Lots of guesses it's refocusing, using attacks to Block. Given that Blocks can be dead cards, this isn't the worst idea. I kinda like it. But the original post hinted it might be everyone errata-ed with a Race for Heritage cards. If this is the case, I expect open Namekian and Saiyan Masteries with race locked RUBO.

About two days ago. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Traits is something a lot of people felt should have been in the game to begin with. I feel like now is better than never and if they implement it correctly, they could make design more intuitive and help the game flow better. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×