The problem here is unrealistic expectations. I've heard that many of the rejects didn't enjoy GDS2. Was it designed to be fun or even fair? I don't think so. The majority of magic players were not even eligible owing to non-USA residence. GDS2 is a reality show meat grinder.
I completed the multiple choice. I didn't think it was so bad. I learned a few things from it that I didn't realise before and came away happy that it wasn't a complete waste of my time.
The only point I resonate with in your entirearticle is disliking Maro; I find his writing so boring.
@greyes3: meh... the "alot" bug strikes again! :( I almost always catch my fingers doing things like that and typing homonyms too. :/ I wish the articles were editable after the fact. Hmmm I used relative positioning (% instead of actual numbers) with the deck lists. Which is probably why they aren't 100% in sync (though I think I used the same values for caps too. They should be fine if the page is viewed at around 1,000 pixels wide. I will keep this in mind next article and actual integers. My apologies for both issues. As far as annoying otherwise do you mean the general graphics? Thanks for commenting. :)
I'm not big on the PRE articles normally, but I can appreciate the work that was put into this. Just to nitpick a bit...does anyone else find the decklist boxes extremely annoying? Particularly here, more so than usual because they didn't seem to center properly with the screenshots. Also, watch out for "alot". I die a little bit inside each time I see one.
I don't know where to start with this article other than to just say "sour grapes much?" I have many issues with this article and not enough time to go through all of them right now.
The purpose of the GDS is not to find the most creative person possible, it is to find the person best suited to making design decisions regarding Magic: The Gathering, as defined by the current design philosophy of the company. This test is essentially 50 questions determining how familiar the person is with the current design philosophy. Some of your answers indicate that you are not very familiar with that philosophy, which is fine, it just is not what they were looking for.
My tipp for playing limited on a budget are the M11 4 Booster Sealeds. You only invest 3.5x4=14 for the boosters and you open 4 Rares/Mythics instead of 3 in the Draft. It takes less time to play those events what is good for me too. Actually those events don't fire often now, that's the bad with it...
Good luck for the next weeks and don't miss the next Heirloom event where you could earn 17 tix for finishing first :-)
Interesting read. Those edge of the chair, seat of the pants 1 life games can be the best. I'll have to point my block playing friends towards this article as well as Lord Erman's excellent ones.
Imho calling out the Head Designer for Magic is both balsy and a little unrealistic. Not to mention needless. Mark Rosewater does not know you. I have met him a couple times and have never gotten the impression of stupidity, foolishness or evilness. In fact he was congenial, conversant and generally amicable. So perhaps instead of painting horns on him, instead stick to the objectionable behaviors you think are caused by him and leave the personal attacks elsewhere. (Yes I know it is tougher to do this without expressing your frustration with your perceptions of the man.)
I won't refute your statements as an expert in your field (since not only am I not an educator, but I have no degree at all.) However some of the things you said do not ring true to me. Some do of course. (Also you need to be more vigilant with typos. I know, I know, a writer is their own worst editor. So get someone else to proof for you.)
I have often felt tests in general were poor methods to teach. Everyone I've ever met from my parents (who are teachers) to my own teachers in school and college professors I've met have all repeated what you said about multiple choice questionnaires. Yes, they are good for sorting in a generalized way (such as checking for preferences or running an opinion survey. But not much else.) They are also as you said easily biased and tend to be used as tools to discriminate against specific groups.
IQ tests though are not the same thing tending to be more about getting a range of cognitive ability rather than being definitively gradable. You could take the same IQ test with the same tester 3x in 3 months and score differently each time. Not sure what your point was about IQ tests but I agree they do not have anything definitive to say here.
I think the multiple choice test comes second because while it is a weeding out tool it is also not the most important aspect of general testing which is the desire to be the next Great Designer. Test number one seems to fill that role quite well. Perhaps the order of the two tests could be reversed to eliminate some of the frustration of having made it past criteria 1 only to be stopped inside the gate and checked again this time with a strip search so to speak.
By the way in the 10 minutes I spent taking the test I scored 28 of 50 so at least you outscored me. :) I think this article could have been way better with a less personal stance and perhaps relying more heavily on your obvious knowledge of learning/knowledge examination procedures. (Nice pyramid graphic btw.)
One last comment/question regarding the level of indignation you seem to have about this whole event. I know Mark Rosewater has become iconic (as a villainous influence) in some players' minds with what is wrong with M:TG today. I could not disagree more but that isn't here nor there. Everyone has opinions and we all think they are valid. If it was Mike Gills or some other WotC bigwig instead who presented and fronted the same test for the GDS would you have felt as strongly?
The funniest thing is how Wizards likes to project an image that the company always cares and listens to the people. I remember (if I recall correctly) at the last Pro Tour, there was a podcast from someone at Wizards and they pretty much said how much they value outside opinions... I guess not so much in this case. Being inept is a pretty hard pill to swallow and it takes a noble person to admit what he/she doesn't know, so I'm not exactly surprised Rosewater hasn't responded. I think Wizards has been fairly pleased with the R&D work produced by those from the previous GDS, so I think that fact (for Mr. Rosewater) is validation enough that his selection process is capable of producing the desired results.
Interesting OPED and creative spurt here Wes, particularly the choices of art. :) I can't say I agree with your points but I like that it is an opinion well-stated and firmly held. As per usual 5xFireball for your style and words.
Wow, three other people popping up to say they liked the 5th Element! I seriously thought I was the only one. And yes, Milla is yummy.
Your definition of realism is interesting, and I think is more of a credit to the actors and effects designers than the story. Although having someone act completely out of character can screw with that as well. There is definitely something to be said for being so engrossed in a movie that you believe the characters would actually act like that.
I actually really like the 5th element, but it's good as a whole nother genre.
When I say "realism" (which I put in quotes because obviously it's not realism since it's sci fi) I mean that the characters are believable, I feel like their world is real. Also I just think the actors in the original dune were 10x better than the ones in the remake. But this is all just my opinion of course, personal taste ect.
The original star wars trilogy had a similar gritty "realism" that made it good (if we can just forget about the stupid furry people on Endor) I like Alien a whole lot as well for other reasons (certianly the "realism" is solid). Event Horizon was well enough done and I enjoyed it.
I picked up the exiler deck because of your article. And I have to admit, it is a blast to play. I even went up against a boltslinger deck and won 2-1 (He took game one, then kor firewalker won games 2 and 3). Thanks for another great article.
5th Element Rocked imho. 2nd best Bruce Willis movie after 12 Monkeys. I enjoyed Dune in both of its incarnations as artistic interpretations. The spice hook is all Herbert and I guess you need to read the books to fully understand the implications of what it is all about.
Well, you bring up two issues. The first is how much realism do you expect in your sci-fi? I think that's a matter of personal preference. I know that I like admittedly crappy stuff like The Fifth Element, which isn't realistic at all. Heck, even in Star Wars, Han Solo talks about making the Kessel run in terms of parsecs, which is a unit of length, not time. Interplanetary space travel, self aware, AI, or just how people react around each other can all lead to different levels of "realism". Heck, even a horrible ass movie like Ice Pirates (anyone besides me remember that thing) can admittedly be "realistic" due to the requirement for water, a dwindling resource. For me, I don't need much realism as long as it is entertaining.
The second issue is: What is your definition of "realism"? I dunno if putting heart cords into your servants, as depicted in Dune by Baron Harkonnen, is "realistic," let alone the fact that space travel requires spice to be used by Guild members (forgive me if I get this wrong, it's been years since I read the book or seen the movie). Let alone the Bene Gesserit and their goofy way of controlling things. If you really want realism, wouldn't Alien fit the bill? Corporation putting people in jeopardy for potential profit? Heck, would a movie like Even Horizon count, where the ship possibly returned from visiting hell? I dunno. I guess the two points are intertwined, but expecting realism from most sci-fi is kind of expecting too much. And calling a movie where the penultimate scene is two guys in their underwear enter a knife fight for control of their families "realistic" is certainly far fetched.
Yeah, I'm assuming it will be automatically banned due to price. Which is probably fine. Black Disruption is a pretty Tier 1 deck in Peasant right now anyway.
the new ones were meh imo but the old ones are simply amazing films. Try to find a sci-fi movie that even comes close to that level of "realism" these days.
The problem here is unrealistic expectations. I've heard that many of the rejects didn't enjoy GDS2. Was it designed to be fun or even fair? I don't think so. The majority of magic players were not even eligible owing to non-USA residence. GDS2 is a reality show meat grinder.
I completed the multiple choice. I didn't think it was so bad. I learned a few things from it that I didn't realise before and came away happy that it wasn't a complete waste of my time.
The only point I resonate with in your entirearticle is disliking Maro; I find his writing so boring.
@greyes3: meh... the "alot" bug strikes again! :( I almost always catch my fingers doing things like that and typing homonyms too. :/ I wish the articles were editable after the fact. Hmmm I used relative positioning (% instead of actual numbers) with the deck lists. Which is probably why they aren't 100% in sync (though I think I used the same values for caps too. They should be fine if the page is viewed at around 1,000 pixels wide. I will keep this in mind next article and actual integers. My apologies for both issues. As far as annoying otherwise do you mean the general graphics? Thanks for commenting. :)
@Nagarjuna: Thanks for the comments. :)
I'm not big on the PRE articles normally, but I can appreciate the work that was put into this. Just to nitpick a bit...does anyone else find the decklist boxes extremely annoying? Particularly here, more so than usual because they didn't seem to center properly with the screenshots. Also, watch out for "alot". I die a little bit inside each time I see one.
I don't know where to start with this article other than to just say "sour grapes much?" I have many issues with this article and not enough time to go through all of them right now.
The purpose of the GDS is not to find the most creative person possible, it is to find the person best suited to making design decisions regarding Magic: The Gathering, as defined by the current design philosophy of the company. This test is essentially 50 questions determining how familiar the person is with the current design philosophy. Some of your answers indicate that you are not very familiar with that philosophy, which is fine, it just is not what they were looking for.
2 new MED4 cards are previewed here: http://www.mtgoacademy.com/exclusive-previews-masters-edition-iv/
Candelabra of Tawnos and Wheel of Fortune. Wheel was first designed to be Mythic!!!!
Great article/series!
My tipp for playing limited on a budget are the M11 4 Booster Sealeds. You only invest 3.5x4=14 for the boosters and you open 4 Rares/Mythics instead of 3 in the Draft. It takes less time to play those events what is good for me too. Actually those events don't fire often now, that's the bad with it...
Good luck for the next weeks and don't miss the next Heirloom event where you could earn 17 tix for finishing first :-)
This article was a blast!
A so detailed description and analysis with quotes of the players to get an inside in what is the backround of their decks and their games!
Thx for that Paul
Interesting read. Those edge of the chair, seat of the pants 1 life games can be the best. I'll have to point my block playing friends towards this article as well as Lord Erman's excellent ones.
An excellent work here JustSin. Probably worth reading more than once. Which for me is a rarity.
Imho calling out the Head Designer for Magic is both balsy and a little unrealistic. Not to mention needless. Mark Rosewater does not know you. I have met him a couple times and have never gotten the impression of stupidity, foolishness or evilness. In fact he was congenial, conversant and generally amicable. So perhaps instead of painting horns on him, instead stick to the objectionable behaviors you think are caused by him and leave the personal attacks elsewhere. (Yes I know it is tougher to do this without expressing your frustration with your perceptions of the man.)
I won't refute your statements as an expert in your field (since not only am I not an educator, but I have no degree at all.) However some of the things you said do not ring true to me. Some do of course. (Also you need to be more vigilant with typos. I know, I know, a writer is their own worst editor. So get someone else to proof for you.)
I have often felt tests in general were poor methods to teach. Everyone I've ever met from my parents (who are teachers) to my own teachers in school and college professors I've met have all repeated what you said about multiple choice questionnaires. Yes, they are good for sorting in a generalized way (such as checking for preferences or running an opinion survey. But not much else.) They are also as you said easily biased and tend to be used as tools to discriminate against specific groups.
IQ tests though are not the same thing tending to be more about getting a range of cognitive ability rather than being definitively gradable. You could take the same IQ test with the same tester 3x in 3 months and score differently each time. Not sure what your point was about IQ tests but I agree they do not have anything definitive to say here.
I think the multiple choice test comes second because while it is a weeding out tool it is also not the most important aspect of general testing which is the desire to be the next Great Designer. Test number one seems to fill that role quite well. Perhaps the order of the two tests could be reversed to eliminate some of the frustration of having made it past criteria 1 only to be stopped inside the gate and checked again this time with a strip search so to speak.
By the way in the 10 minutes I spent taking the test I scored 28 of 50 so at least you outscored me. :) I think this article could have been way better with a less personal stance and perhaps relying more heavily on your obvious knowledge of learning/knowledge examination procedures. (Nice pyramid graphic btw.)
One last comment/question regarding the level of indignation you seem to have about this whole event. I know Mark Rosewater has become iconic (as a villainous influence) in some players' minds with what is wrong with M:TG today. I could not disagree more but that isn't here nor there. Everyone has opinions and we all think they are valid. If it was Mike Gills or some other WotC bigwig instead who presented and fronted the same test for the GDS would you have felt as strongly?
The funniest thing is how Wizards likes to project an image that the company always cares and listens to the people. I remember (if I recall correctly) at the last Pro Tour, there was a podcast from someone at Wizards and they pretty much said how much they value outside opinions... I guess not so much in this case. Being inept is a pretty hard pill to swallow and it takes a noble person to admit what he/she doesn't know, so I'm not exactly surprised Rosewater hasn't responded. I think Wizards has been fairly pleased with the R&D work produced by those from the previous GDS, so I think that fact (for Mr. Rosewater) is validation enough that his selection process is capable of producing the desired results.
So, what is a good textbook for testing theory?
nice article - you can see you put a lot of time and work into it and it makes it a pleasure to read
Keep it up - look forward to the rest
Interesting OPED and creative spurt here Wes, particularly the choices of art. :) I can't say I agree with your points but I like that it is an opinion well-stated and firmly held. As per usual 5xFireball for your style and words.
Wow, three other people popping up to say they liked the 5th Element! I seriously thought I was the only one. And yes, Milla is yummy.
Your definition of realism is interesting, and I think is more of a credit to the actors and effects designers than the story. Although having someone act completely out of character can screw with that as well. There is definitely something to be said for being so engrossed in a movie that you believe the characters would actually act like that.
I actually really like the 5th element, but it's good as a whole nother genre.
When I say "realism" (which I put in quotes because obviously it's not realism since it's sci fi) I mean that the characters are believable, I feel like their world is real. Also I just think the actors in the original dune were 10x better than the ones in the remake. But this is all just my opinion of course, personal taste ect.
The original star wars trilogy had a similar gritty "realism" that made it good (if we can just forget about the stupid furry people on Endor) I like Alien a whole lot as well for other reasons (certianly the "realism" is solid). Event Horizon was well enough done and I enjoyed it.
X-
I just wanted to say be on the look out for Sheldons article this week at Starcity Games. It will be simular to this one.
Did you try tweaking it with Legacy staples? Was there anything in it you disliked drawing?
I picked up the exiler deck because of your article. And I have to admit, it is a blast to play. I even went up against a boltslinger deck and won 2-1 (He took game one, then kor firewalker won games 2 and 3). Thanks for another great article.
I disagree....The Fifth Element was not crappy. I am drawn to it whenever it is on HBO. I also am smitten by milla jovich.
5th Element Rocked imho. 2nd best Bruce Willis movie after 12 Monkeys. I enjoyed Dune in both of its incarnations as artistic interpretations. The spice hook is all Herbert and I guess you need to read the books to fully understand the implications of what it is all about.
Well, you bring up two issues. The first is how much realism do you expect in your sci-fi? I think that's a matter of personal preference. I know that I like admittedly crappy stuff like The Fifth Element, which isn't realistic at all. Heck, even in Star Wars, Han Solo talks about making the Kessel run in terms of parsecs, which is a unit of length, not time. Interplanetary space travel, self aware, AI, or just how people react around each other can all lead to different levels of "realism". Heck, even a horrible ass movie like Ice Pirates (anyone besides me remember that thing) can admittedly be "realistic" due to the requirement for water, a dwindling resource. For me, I don't need much realism as long as it is entertaining.
The second issue is: What is your definition of "realism"? I dunno if putting heart cords into your servants, as depicted in Dune by Baron Harkonnen, is "realistic," let alone the fact that space travel requires spice to be used by Guild members (forgive me if I get this wrong, it's been years since I read the book or seen the movie). Let alone the Bene Gesserit and their goofy way of controlling things. If you really want realism, wouldn't Alien fit the bill? Corporation putting people in jeopardy for potential profit? Heck, would a movie like Even Horizon count, where the ship possibly returned from visiting hell? I dunno. I guess the two points are intertwined, but expecting realism from most sci-fi is kind of expecting too much. And calling a movie where the penultimate scene is two guys in their underwear enter a knife fight for control of their families "realistic" is certainly far fetched.
I guess I'm showing my nerdy side here. Ah well.
Yeah, I'm assuming it will be automatically banned due to price. Which is probably fine. Black Disruption is a pretty Tier 1 deck in Peasant right now anyway.
...but cards over 10,00 are baNNED I GUESS: maybe it will reach that value?
Sinkhole will be popular in Peasant where rarities are based on lowest in paper or online....
the new ones were meh imo but the old ones are simply amazing films. Try to find a sci-fi movie that even comes close to that level of "realism" these days.