Prof-It! Episode 53: A Bigger Game, Part 1

Today’s episode is about something a little bit different—it’s a hypothetical conversation on what we’d need to expand our game to match some of the biggest TCGs on the market right now, back in the old scripted format. It’s different and you might not agree, but I hope you enjoy the conversation!

Want to follow the latest prof-it! updates in other forms of media? Follow me at:

facebook.com/thejwittz
twitter.com/thejwittz

Reader Interactions

30 replies

  1. Adam Capriola

    This is probably the most important video you’ve ever made – kudos for putting all this info out there. I think it’s really important for us players to know exactly where Pokemon stands compared to other card games, so that we can try and influence improvement.

    I feel like the playerbase is going to be kinda split on whether or not they want it to be a “bigger game” is certain aspects. As is, the game is fun and welcoming, which is great, but there are obviously plenty of people who would like to see the game evolve into something more rewarding monetarily. I don’t know if that would be good or bad for the tournament atmosphere.

    Aside from that though, I think there is a HUGE need to simply make the game more legit from a technical viewpoint. There are obvious flaws with the game design, and way more emphasis needs to be put into R&D. 

    For example, the recent rule changes with B/W are pretty blatant attempts to dumb the game down: 

    1. Apparently Poke-Powers and Poke-Bodies are too confusing so we’re reverting back to the old days when there were only Pokemon Powers, aka Abilities now.
    2. There are no restrictions on going first anymore because that might confuse people otherwise.
    3. Supporters are now discarded immediately, like every other Trainer card (because leaving on the field until the end of your turn is too advanced).

    I feel like the game needs to have more variation to become more intricate and advanced. The simpler it is, the closer it becomes to checkers. I think most people want the game to become more chess-like.

    And unfortunately like you talked about Josh, we have almost zero input as far as game design goes because of the huge disconnect with Japan. I don’t know if that will ever be fixed, even though it should be easy as having a diplomat (if you will) who’s job it is to communicate with the non-Japanese speaking players, and report back to Japan. Seems easy enough, right?

    In the end, it all comes down to money though. It’s wrong, but if Pokemon feels like the game will continue to grow, even with their somewhat lackadaisical attitude towards it, then there is no point to throwing money around to make massive changes. 

    All the fansites that have sprung up the past couple years help publicize the game, but I don’t think we put much pressure on Pokemon to improve the game. We make things kind of easy for them, honestly. They get massive free pub from us without any real incentive to spend the money necessary to take it to new heights because frankly, they’re probably comfortable with where the game is at right now. Why risk doubling their financial investment into the game if they’re unsure they’ll get double the return?

    Yes, I know the online game is going to be huge and hopefully with more people playing, we as players will have a larger voice. It’s obvious Pokemon is committed to the game, but how committed are they?

    • Mike v  → Adam

      hey adam not to put this random but did you get my email im having problems and i really wanna be a member again

    • Aaron J. Walker  → Adam

      Yes, I’d rather it be more chess like myself. Catcher pretty much killed any chance of setting up and executing any sort of strategy. That, more than anything, has changed the game for the worse in the short term in my opinion. Pretty much whoever gets to Catcher first, wins the game irregardless of who goes first. It negates any chance of strategy, synergy, or creativity that a player puts into deck building. Catcher should never have been allowed.

      1. I understand the change to Abilities, brings it more in line with the video game. But now they have to update the cards so Pokemon can have an Ability that negates or affects another Ability like Poke Powers and Poke Bodies did (i.e. Umbreon’s Moonlight Fang attack needs to be updated to affecting Abilities. Or even Glaceon’s Lvl X Poke Power).

      2. Yeah, give people some credit for being a “little” smarter than they think. My son was able to understand the old rule straight away when he started playing the TCG at 7 years-old.

      3. I didn’t understand why the change to discard immediately either. Leaving it active until the end of your turn helps BOTH players know what has been played in the turn and cuts down on confusion.

      I left a comment on YouTube that I don’t think the online game will be the boon as expected for younger players. 

      I’ve seen all too often most Junior level players are trading away the codes even when it is explained to them they can go online and play.  And these are the kids who already play the TCG, they seem to have little to no interest in playing online. Masters do, maybe even Seniors, but Juniors don’t seem to get the “virtual” card thing. It’s a little to esoteric for them I think. 

      Pair that with most kids usually have their computer time monitored/controlled by well meaning parents (like I do as a Poke Dad). If a kid has 1 hour after their homework is done to go on the computer, they’d probably rather play Club Penguin, Poptropica or any other of a host of kid games on the internet. Realistically, they can play Pokemon after their computer time is over in real life so why play it online?

      I am looking forward to part 2 and wish there was a way to have some input into the way the game is developed and implemented in the US.

      Keep up the good work :D

    • Anonymous  → Adam

      I definatly want there to be a lot more thinking and less just attaching, drawing, and attacking benched pokemon with Catcher or Yanmega. I also think that you are completely right that the game changed to be geared more to kids with the simplicity of it.

    • Anonymous  → Adam

      Thanks for posting the video and the huge commentary! It’s really well-written and insightful. I think your thoughts are actually pretty important–because you barely play now you probably have a pretty good view on the full game from the outside looking in. The analysis on how the game is being “dumbed down” with the new rules is an interesting point I’ve never really thought about before. 

      Thanks to everybody else commenting here, too! Youtube’s 400-character limit isn’t the best way to get everybody’s full thoughts, so thanks for all the discussion! I plan on taking lots of excerpts from comments all around the ‘net for part 2, so thanks for all your input!

      • Edmund Nelson  → Anonymous

        Should we post potential solutions to these problems as well in the comments? or just the problems for now.

        • Scott Gunn  → Anonymous

          My thoughts since I first negotiated a rotation or release was simplify and reduce the releases.  I would be much more willing to buy packaged products if I knew it would contain more than one playable card- maybe.  Also it would be great if you could count on those cards being effective more than a few months.
          I understand that every card can’t be amazing.  Why produce 200+ cards that will rarely play a year, seems costly and counter productive.

      • Adam Capriola  → Anonymous

        Sure thing man, this topic makes for great discussion. A couple of other things I want to add…

        One of the other big things that restrict the TCG is that it’s made in the likeness of the video game. That kinda kills some of the flexibility that I bet the designers wish they had. I don’t play the video game, but from what I understand there are attacks of effects that work only a certain percentage of the time. Hence all the coin flips in the TCG which replicate that variance (and will never be removed).

        In the past there have been some AWESOME formats though which were a lot more fun than the formats as of late. I might be a little biased, but I really enjoyed playing from 2004 to 2007 (basically before DP was released). 

        Back then, there was a lot more emphasis on Stadium cards, which may sound kind of trivial, but it made a HUGE difference in gameplay. There were a lot of powerful Stadiums out back then, so deck strategies would revolve almost solely upon different Stadiums. It was common for decks to dedicate 4 or 5 spots Stadiums, whether they be offensive or counter-Stadiums.

        Take Battle Frontier for example. Most decks depended on Pidgeot RG for consistency, and Battle Frontier turned it off. So there would be decks that played 4 Battle Frontier to shut-down any Pidgeot based deck, and Pidgeot decks in turn needed to play 4, sometimes 5 counter Stadiums so they could keep going. 

        Think how different decks would be right now if they had to make space for 4 or 5 Stadiums! Stadiums battles were really important and they added an extra layer of complexity to the game.

        Cursed Stone and Desert Ruins were 2 other powerful Stadiums which would punish the really powerful decks and give less-intrinsically strong cards a chance to thrive. 

        A good example of such deck would be LunaRock which used Lunatone DX and Solrock DX + LM. If you look at those cards now, they seem awful, but with Cursed Stone and Desert Ruins they made for a deadly deck at the time.

        Cessation Crystal was also a really powerful Tool card which decks needed to respond to with Windstorm.

        Basically, these cards created a game within the game. We don’t have and haven’t had that in a few years now. I know Eviolite is coming out, but that seems like it’s just making strong cards stronger (coughzekromcough). Why not put some kind of restriction on WHICH basic Pokemon it can be attached to? 

        Tropical Beach is good for the game since it gives weaker/slower decks a chance, and thankfully Pokemon was smart enough to release it to the public (oh wait…).

        Small changes that have been made like this are hurting the game big time. It’s like playing chess without your rooks and knights; you’re left with a bunch of pawns.

        • Aaron J. Walker  → Adam

          I don’t know Adam, having played the VG from Emerald through to the current Black/White, I don’t find it to  be all that much like the VG at all except in reference and names.

          For example, every Pokemon in the VG has a total of 4 moves. We only have two at most (not counting some Poke Powers, Poke Bodies and Abilities) for the TCG. Imagine if every Pokemon in the TCG had 4 attacks you could use?

          Also, most attacks hit without fail although there are some attacks in the VG that are 70%, 80% and up but only a handful that are less than 50%. However, true to form of any video game, even the 100% attacks sometimes fail while battling the Elite Four, lol. Most attacks land every single time. 

          The only variance is for the effects of attacks like burned, paralyzed, etc. and even some of those are pretty much guaranteed using the right Pokemon under the right conditions. And there are many poison attacks that also hit without fail. 

          Burned isn’t a coin flip in the VG, if your Pokemon is burned, it lands every time with the effects of burned getting stronger each turn. Unlike the TCG where it’s a coin flip :s

          As for me, I lost interest during the SP days since the came seemed to be favoring raw power and very little strategy and I think it has continued to stay that way. Although I am back to playing consistently (League and BR) and encouraging my son as well, too many Pokemon have high HP, high attack and low energy cost like Zekrom and Reshiram while I still maintain Catcher should NEVER have been allowed (back) into the game.

          Bringing back more Stadiums may help but I fear they will continue to favor the above mentioned high attack, high HP basic Pokemon that pretty much kill advanced strategy. And it makes little sense to have a card like Eviolite for an extra 20 HP attached to a basic when Zekrom can Bolt Strike for 120 on turn one.

        • Mekkah  → Aaron

          I did not play during the EX days but have gone back in time with a friend a few time to try it out, and I gotta say I agree with Adam. Strategies were deeper and more subtle. Even the DP formats that include Gardevoir and the deck meant to beat it (Empoleon/Bronzong), you generally were not going for taking six prizes in six turns. You were still dealing with long term planning in both cases. Is it worth breaking my Psychic Lock chain to grab a KO this turn? (the answer usually seems to be no) What do I need to Dual Splash so that these Pokemon die in a timely fashion? (generally Pokemon that you can’t beat with Bronzong’s spread power and attack as easily)

          Now, SP gets a lot of flak and it’s easy to see why, but they are definitely not your basic beatdown deck. SP decks have a LOT of tricks up their sleeve (all three main different variants), and SP decks usually contain a lot of 1-of copies for teching purposes because they are so accessible through Cyrus. You do not press the attack button every turn for a win – there are usually several approaches to get a prize during the turn you are playing, but you have to think about which one will let you take more prizes in the future, too. SP Pokemon were also generally too weak to take out fully developed traditional attackers unless they had a type advantage, meaning there’s always pressure on you to take the lead and keep it.

          If anything, I’d say Gyarados and Gengar/Vileplume are more at fault for for dumbing down the game. The former only uses one attack the whole game pretty much, and everything is geared towards being able to do that as often as possible. The latter simply stops 60% of the possible plays, and the turns taken in matches involving this deck have about as much depth as the format we have to day.

          Speaking of that…right now there’s just less going on. As Adam said, Stadiums were big during EX. They are completely irrelevant now. Lost World might as well just be a Trainer that you play when you have 6 Mons in the Lost Zone. Burned Tower is basically a variation on playing Fisherman or Energy Retrieval with different pros and cons. Indigo Plateau…is probably best if you are building a Red Zone deck but you forgot like half the staples so you are trying to fill spaces.

          Cards just have gotten so simple. Look at Dusknoir Lv.X for example. It only has a Poke Power, but it’s a novel. Pretty much no card nowadays has that. Nearly all of today’s good cards deal vanilla damage, maybe some status effect or something added to it. And that dictates a lot of today’s strategies too. Yanmega/Magnezone and Reuniclus variants come closest to having something that isn’t a simple “keep attackers coming” plan.

          Also, decks need so many “consistency” cards to not draw dead. From looking at old deck lists, I got the idea that you could be as consistent or techy as you wanted to be. 2-2 Claydol, 4 Roseanne, 4 Celio/Bebe, maybe 1-2 others seems to be all you need, and these cards generally help you all game long. If you want, you can add more for insurance. Decks now need 4 Collector (earlygame only, so the rest is useless), 4 Communication, and then like 8 other draw supporters that basically play the lottery (shuffle your hand in or be forced to discard cards…or just draw 3 with Cheren). But right now there is like no point to run more consistency than the standard amount, since they’re not amazing cards in their own right, and you need a lot of space to use the few good main deck parts too.

          Of course, the reasoning for that is obvious. It makes the game accessible for kids. It is a long-running theme in Black and White to bring the game back to basics, to dumb it down, both the TCG and the VG. Everything implies a total reset of the system, up to the HGSS-on rotation.

          I do have some hope for a more subtle format again, with EX cards and N. But the direction they are going currently is very clear.

          Oh, and yes, being attached to the VG game definitely is not helping. Lots of these ex-era stadium cards have locations never mentioned in the games, Delta Species/Holon is a TCG concept, etc. For someone who doesn’t know much about them, these have some kind of mysterious and eerie aura around them. They’re very intriguing.

          This may have gone very off-topic but hey it was worth the effort.

        • Aron Janstad Wright  → Adam

          “but I really enjoyed playing from 2004 to 2007 (basically before DP was released). ”

          Completely agree!i completely hated DP —through—> Arceus!And now that everyone is playing a load of supporters, it kinda feels like its reverting back to the ex era, when a large amount of supporters were played. DP completely demolished that. Sure you normally played Rosannes and bebes but just a few years before that half a deck could be supporters and tools and stadiums. 

        • Eric Smith  → Adam

          Another thing I have to TOTALLY disagree with you on. I thought the game got much better once DP was released. I will say the EX era had some awesome stadium cards, but in general EXes ran the game which annoyed the living hell out of me.

          Another huge problem I had with the EX series was just how downright boring the attacks were. Almost every basic was 50 hp, 1 retreat, C for 10, CC for 20. So many cards were just copy and pasted I felt like, and the only cards with interesting moves were EXes and some of the delta pokemon. DP’s card attacks were significantly more interesting, for basics and evolutions alike. Lv. X cards were also probably the most balanced “uber” cards the TCG has seen. They were extremely viable and could shift the game in your favor, but you could never really rely on them since you were limited in how many copies you could have.

          And also what happened to energy-less attacks? Those were one of my favorite mechanics the TCG has had and I never understood why it disappeared. It wasn’t one of those gimmicky, obviously set specific mechanics like delta pokemon/pokemon SP, and again was just another case of cards having more interesting attacks than previous sets.

          Also from a collector’s perspective DP was a huge step up from the EX series. Flavor text and pokemon info finally made it’s return and card designs in general got cleaned up significantly.

    • Eric Smith  → Adam

      A couple things I don’t really agree with your post about. I actually
      really like the new Abilities. It connects the TCG more to the video games
      (which they are based on anyways). If anything they are like a combination of pokebodies and pokepowers since we can use abilities even when affected by a special condition, unlike the wizard days when we only had pokemon powers.

      And also I’m glad they had us discard
      supporters immediately. I never saw any reason to leave the card out
      for the whole turn anyways.

      However, I think everyone agrees about the massive advantage of going first though.

  2. Mike v

    nice artle  i was just wondering would they ever rotate some sets in like you know mix them up and then rotate them out  next season its just a idea? and have a ban list. so it will keep the game intrested while your old cards can still see play. another thing its hard to find tournys they are expanded so far away. another problem is the way the cp work and point system they kinda left us on a cliffhanger.

  3. Edmund Nelson

    Speaking as a player who quit pokemon to play magic after finding out about the terrible prize support, (seriously why spend 300$ on cards when the EV is about -150 when i can have as much fun spending 500$ then make over 2000$).  I think that you forgot about one key factor thats keeping pokemon down. The perception from people in different games.

    The people who I play magic the gathering with think that pokemon has much lower varience in gameplay, but a much higher luck factor. Oftentimes they were frustrated when certain matchups felt like complete coinflips. One of the most hated decks in magic are Charbelcher decks, which win or lose on the first turn of the game.  Tons of games feel like the fundemental turn of the game was 2 or three. Either ZPST(in this case) would win on turn three by koing every oddish or lose because trainer lock came online.  Or in stage ones versus reshiram typlosion, stage ones would smash three cyndiquil and stome the reshirams or die to a 2x typlosion sweep. There was very little apperent skill involved in going first, and flipping heads on reversal. The matchups seemed very liniar, one player was the beatdown, another played a control role. 

    The lower varience of pokemon games is another major problem people have with pokemon. Most games of any one particular matchup play out almost identically from the previous.  Stage ones would setup right away and stomp over Yanmega/Magnezone (The deck all of the people agreed was the most skill intensive and interesting deck to play), or Yanmega/Magnezone would keep up in the early game and have a amazing late game to play against them. The people playing the match said that they would always be doing the exact same plan every single game. Setup play a bit of offense to get 1-2 quick prizes, and play the “real” game from there. There was very little interaction from what we could tell, choosing which enemy pokemon to Ko was probably the most interactive part, and even then it was almost always take out the late game carry for the opposing side. The seeming consequence of this lack of interaction was that games were very similar from one another, compared to for example the caw-blade mirror match. Sometimes in Caw-blade mirrors one hit from a hawk with a Sword of feast and famine meant lights out for the opponent. Other times the attack would be completely irrelevant as the player would just bury the opponent with poision from inkmoth nexus and board control with Gideon Jura. Another major factor about the low varience is that there is a very large amount of cards in pokemon that let a player search their deck (tutors they are called in magic)  that make it extremely easy to setup 3 even 5 card combos.

    The final major gripe they had can be explained best by this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RKwyKNEWRY. How much time is wasted shuffling in a game of pokemon? Well it takes thirty seconds for a person to riffle shuffle one time. You should riffle shuffle 7 times for a 60 card deck and -1 time for every 10 cards less. Say for instance I go T1 Dual ball then Pont then dual ball. I spend 3 minutes shuffling a 52 card deck, then 3 minutes shuffling a 54 card deck then 3 more minutes shuffling. Spending a total of 9 minutes shuffling in the very first turn of the game. Then your opponent plays pokemon collector, guess what 3 more minutes shuffling. So we spent 15 minutes playing the game but 12 of that was shuffling my deck and 3 minutes was spent actually playing the game. I wonder something then, How do Gothitelle decks ever win against zekrom? If Zekrom decks shuffle their deck properly to properly randomize the deck they would spend over 25 minutes just shuffling.

  4. Anthony Smith

    Your point about exposing children to a competitive environment is the thing above all, I feel, is what holds Pokemon back, and you hit the nail on the head at around the 10 minute mark. Pokemon belongs to Nintendo, and it needs to carry a certain image. We will never see players straight up competing for cash. It will never happen. Nintendo/Pokemon can never support any movement towards monetising the game for players.

    When Super Smash Bros. Brawl was on the MLG pro circuit last year, Nintendo wouldn’t even let them Live stream the events. That is how averse Nintendo is from the idea.

    But that is ok. Anybody who wants to play a card game purely for money should not be playing a game where many effects start with ‘Flip a Coin’, because it would lead to tears.

    However, it can also be a good thing. It means Pokemon does not need to create unrealistic expectations for its players. It means Pokemon can invest its money. It’s money can be invested in a way that will mean something to more than just the top few that would otherwise earn that money.

    Money, whilst speaking a lot about anything, is ultimately an untangible thing.

    Booster packs, trophies, travel stipends, support for the judges/organisers -> That matters. 

    • Aaron J. Walker  → Anthony

      I agree Anthony, I think the things that matter most to the kids are the memories, the experiences, the friendships made as well as getting booster packs, trophies and the like. I read somewhere else that some parents are dropping their kids from competitive play because they’ve cut back on scholarships?

      As a Poke Parent, I want my son to play because he enjoys it, makes good friends and learns valuable  life lessons, not so he can win a scholarship, that’s my job to find a way to pay for that as the parent.

      Monetary prizes should never be the reason anyone plays Pokemon. There are Poker and Black Jack tournaments for that.

      • Steven Nilsen  → Aaron

        Oh come on!  How am I supposed to convince my peers that this silliness isn’t worth it without a looming scholarship prize?

        Life lessons and social skills are taught through LIFE.  We play card games for fun, counting and other mental gymnastics.   

        Gambling is a whole other thing and that I’ll shit on too.

    • Steven Nilsen  → Anthony

      I think this “for money” discussion is confusing earning a scholarship with poker.  These are two different things.  Scholarships are very cool and that’s the route Pokemon should stick too.  Adults who play, who don’t need scholarship money should be able to offer it to somebody who could use is.

      The only way to “make money” in this is to guess what cards will become hot and invest.  Shaymin and Pachirisu come to mind.  Reshiram essentially doubled in value too.  None would had been bad investments.

  5. Blazing Dragon

    As a player having come back recently (going into my first full season), it would be great to see Pokemon become more competetive through better prize support. It need not be in cash or scholarship, but in more tangible things like having trophies for tournaments, booster packs, special sleeves, binders, caps, deck boxes, etc, etc. Changing the game to something more legit is a MUST to bring the game to the next level. Games like the defunct (internationally, at least) DuelMasters, Card Fight Vanguard, and Yu Gi Oh all have rule systems that focus much more on skill then luck. Most of these games are still being played in Japan, so I really wonder how is it that the Pokemon Company can continue to make such rule changes as “let’s give the player going first all the advantage” when every other CCG/TCG I’ve ever played have at least put some sort of a limiter on the player going first (small things like not drawing or not being able to attack). They should really consider something along the same vein… >_<

    The large majority of the player base lies OUTSIDE of Japan, so you'd think they'd send someone to TPCi to get
    feedback from the international community.

    I know I'm basically repeating what Josh said in his video, but everything he mentioned really hit home, so I really felt like getting it off my chest. I sincerely hope someone, ANYONE with a little clout in TPCi sees this, and at least gives a thought to it.

  6. Robin Gimbel

    IMO the main problem is that pokemon has bad prices for events….compered to other TCG. Magic has cash.. a lot and Yugioh often had some tournements with Prices like X-Box, PSP and so on.

    Even the youngest Player is more exited about these things than booster . So in the end, here were i live, many Kids quit and played a other TCG.

    Like someone said, often you have to spend up to XXX $$$ in cash for a winning deck… An you get? .. what? somme boosters? maybe a display? Nothing to make it even most of the time.

    And for the people who will say “its all about fun playing”:

    Ever tried to grow your local playerbase? Talk with “new” Pokeparents a tell then what they have to spend  to get something worth it. Right now i can understand Parents who don´t want/allow her kids to start the game.. =(

    Happy to become comments !

    • Aaron J. Walker  → Robin

      I think that is a huge part of the problem, it cost to much to get the good decks. You either have to trade away the keys to your house or spend out the nose to buy the “good” cards.

      The Pokemon Company is caught between a rock and a hard place: they have to have things like rares and super ultra rares to keep people buying packs so they keep making money but, on the other hand, the high cost of those cards keep many players at only the most casual of levels before they drop out because they keep getting beat at League by the Reshiboars and MagneBoar (et. al.) decks. 

      In chess, the amount you’ve spent on your chess set is of no consequence to your ability to become a top ranked player, however, in Pokemon, money is the deciding factor and it should not be for what’s ostensibly a game for kids.

      That’s why I really like Josh’s suggestion of going to a 40 card deck like we already play during Pre-releases. It would cut down on at least some of the financial disparity in the game.

  7. pokejav

    Josh, what an important conversation to initiate. I agree with you 100% that although the game would benefit from improved prizes, there has to be consideration for the younger kids in the game. Scholarship money is an excellent incentive that any parent would agree with. The company line that they have a set budget for tournaments sounds to me like what we here in Washington DC from bureaucrats. They are earining more than enought, and if they were wise they would invest in increasing their number of players by rewarding them.
    I hope that Pokeman America is paying attention to your videos and take your ideas with seriousness. You are offering them invaluable feedback to take this game to the next level.

  8. Anonymous

    Stellar presentation Video J-Wittz.  Keep the ideas coming.

    You are on point with your keys to keeping Pokemon competitive. Syncing up with Japan is much needed. Once this is done,   money & effort should be put into R&D to keep the set design fresh and balanced.  Greater communication (especially with high level players) is needed to keep the game design on point.
    Also, to make the game more competitive and to keep older players in the mix the game needs:1.) High level game mechanics (i agree with adam about the dumbing down of the game in the recent sets)2.) AN OFFICIAL LIMITED FORMAT  (Draft)Wizards and MTG make a KILLING on packs bought to play 8 Player booster draft and sealed deck. Why?  Because the format is relevant, tests true skill,  has depth, and is amazingly fun to play.Whenever a new Pokemon set comes out,  my 3 friends (ranked Massachusetts area players) and I always get a box, and booster draft it.  Some of the best games / fun I’ve had playing the game yet.I understand that1.) It would cause Pokemon to have to charge to enter any k-valued tournament that included limited format (duh, you have to pay for packs)2.) Limited formats (having to draft and then build a deck in 15 minutes) are not conducive to juniors.Anyway. Just my 2 cents

  9. stephen shirley

    i don’t like the online because you only get them fron packs and you have to pay for each pack well on play tcg you have every card for free

  10. Michael A.D. Merriam

    Where in the world would I go to find out more information about that “Yu-Gi-Oh!-like” Format that Japan is currently working on? I’m interested to read more about it.

  11. Steven Nilsen

    General comment, apart from the current discussion:  nice job Jason.  I hope that you start a small fire with this.  

Leave a Reply

You are logged out. Register. Log in.