MTG Salvation

Ok guys. I understand most of us can't do much with the new set because we simply have to test the cards. I also know wizards wants to sell cards.

With this in my mind I went reading a few articles on wizards.com dailymtg. And I'm just wondering why they hype cards so much everyone else sees no competetive or even casual use in. And what the hell is up with that writing style anyways? Its totally bananas. :/

link for reference: http://www.wizards.com/magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/td/109

As a player who just recently started again after a some-years-break I'd really like to know if this has always been that way. Or is it just my imagination?

(if this is the wrong forum... you know what to do, mods)

It's Flores. He's a good guy, however; he tends to have a rather odd opinion on cards. He never really innovates, but changes a few cards.

Also, he is the same guy who is saying that Koth of the Hammer should be banned. Smooth...

Maybe you should change your thread title from "Why are daily-mtg articles so horrible?" to "Why is Mike Flores so horrible?" since that is what you really seem to be saying.

Quote from CookedChestnuts

It's Flores. He's a good guy, however; he tends to have a rather odd opinion on cards. He never really innovates, but changes a few cards.

Also, he is the same guy who is saying that Koth of the Hammer should be banned. Smooth...

In that article in the OP Flores does say that Koth is

potentially the most consistently powerful planeswalker of all time.

Dailymtg aren't meant to be taken too seriously, as the designers of MTG seldom have anything bad to say about recent sets and tend to overhype everything.

Na, he's right. Lately all the articles on WoTC website have been lacking to me. No new concepts (aside from SoM) have been brought forth. Not even a background discussion article on Koth. It just seems that they are all too busy with the new set to really do anything productive for the MTG environment.

Quote from MinisterOfImpediments

Maybe you should change your thread title from "Why are daily-mtg articles so horrible?" to "Why is Mike Flores so horrible?" since that is what you really seem to be saying.

I really don't know if I was just reading articles written by Mike Flores. Seriously, without any irony or sarcasm. The linked article was just an example.

I glimpsed the article and I don't see what's wrong with it, it previews a lot of cards and some of the cards are neat.

Something important to bear in mind is that the "tournament player" isn't the primary purchaser of M:tG sealed product (the driver of WotC profits). Thus, WotC's site strives to appeal to the lowest common denominator of Magic player, which isn't a bad thing... it's just a thing.

Flores' article seems just fine to me given those parameters.

Quote from OrgPlayKnoxville

Something important to bear in mind is that the "tournament player" isn't the primary purchaser of M:tG sealed product (the driver of WotC profits). Thus, WotC's site strives to appeal to the lowest common denominator of Magic player, which isn't a bad thing... it's just a thing.

Flores' article seems just fine to me given those parameters.

The only issue with that line of reasoning being I would lay money that very few casual players read daily mtg articles. I know for a fact none of my casual friends do. The other day I was showing the visual spoiler to a few of them and hand to god they were like "Wow this game has a website, that updates that often. What would they even put on it?"

This has been a week for spoilers for the upcoming set, Scars of Mirrodin. So no, I wouldn't say that what you're seeing right now represents the norm when it comes to dailymtg articles.

Quote from Spawnman62

Na, he's right. Lately all the articles on WoTC website have been lacking to me. No new concepts (aside from SoM) have been brought forth. Not even a background discussion article on Koth. It just seems that they are all too busy with the new set to really do anything productive for the MTG environment.

Once the new set is out and things settle down, they will return to having a greater variety of articles.

Quote from Picc

The only issue with that line of reasoning being I would lay money that very few casual players read daily mtg articles. I know for a fact none of my casual friends do. The other day I was showing the visual spoiler to a few of them and hand to god they were like "Wow this game has a website, that updates that often. What would they even put on it?"

That's funny, but part of the issue. Like most places on the internet today readers expect content - lots of content. They are also creatures of habit, so they expect thier content on a regular feeding schedule. I am as guilty as the next. The truth is that nobody has enough to say to fill that gaping desire for content. Even if they are just writing one article a week it is very hard to continually say something new, so most of it is just rehash. Why do you think you see the same types of "top 5 for limited", "Best SOM Commons" articles everywhere. It's habit.

It's the 80-20 rule. You're really writing for the 20% who would read it. Not only that, but not every article on the mothership is designed for you. I read Rosewater, because normally he is teasing us with soemthing in the future and I find his writing style easy to read.

I hate tuesdays and wednesdays, since I don't care a lot about flavor, combos, casual play et et. Unless they are spoiling new cards I don't go there. I should enjoy Limited Information, but I find it hard to understand Steve. I'd much rather read one of the posters in our limited forum here who I know has a good command on draft.

Thursdays I do like. Flores loves to hype. Go find his article on Lotus Cobra back when they were spoiling Zen, but I find his breakdown on the tournament scene pretty accurate, and I love decks of the week.

Magic articles are just for skimming for ones that interest you. I like Jacob van lunen because he has (or at least receives) some good ideas for usually standard decks. The budget part sort of appeals to me too but better non-budget cards to replace some cards are usually pretty obvious. I'm sure some people like the flavor/art stuff or limited info too. They just have a lot of content to read, nothing wrong with it.

http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/deck/545

Am I missing something BIG or is this deck not Standard legal? :|

You're missing something, somewhere, because that deck is perfectly Standard-legal. The sets in Standard are Shards, Conflux, Alara Reborn, M10, Zendikar, Worldwake, RoE, and M11. While it's true that the linked deck won't be Standard-legal in one week, it's still legal for now, and rotation won't happen for a good month online.

Pro-tip for the future: When saying, "is it me, or is something off here?" about something, it helps to point out what looks off. As it stands right now, I have no idea why you'd think that deck isn't Standard-legal.

The articles have definitely been suffering as of late, especially the abomination that is Building on a Budget. I honestly cringe every time I open the page, but I guess I'm just a glutton for punishment. That section used to be fantastic before JVL took it over, and I have TONS of decks that I built from the days of Bleiweiss and Moldenhauer-Salazar. I mean, this week's was basically "The EvT decks aren't all that great but you can put more and better cards in them and they don't suck as much anymore!" No decklists, no real ideas that anyone couldn't figure out after a minute or two, and that's just this week. Even the decks he makes are very lackluster, and the couple of times I've played with them they were pretty sub-standard. I still consistently win with all of my decks from the other two authors I mentioned, and I just have to say JVL has shown to be a very poor choice for that article. He doesn't even try to describe what his idea of "budget" really is!

(I apologize for the long rant about BoaB, but it irks me when one of my favorite articles gets butchered in the way it has been.)

@Spike - Yeah, almost half of that deck is rotating in days, and he's talking about how SoM is bringing new changes to the archetype. Then why not take out the Shards cards and put in some SoM cards?! I know he's just posting what appears to be a random R/W Aggro decklist, but I mean c'mon...really?

Point taken, somehow my mind played a trick on me. Maybe because the article is linked this way on the main page:



"Adding SoM to WR Aggro". Then there are no SoM cards, but Alara ones. And it is called Standard. Wat? This is what looks off. :|

I'm not the biggest fan of Adam Styborski's articles. I liked Serious Fun when Kelly Digges was writing it, and it seems like Styborski is pulling a JVL. His reports from pro events are even littered with typos, which screams "unprofessional" to me.

I remeber the Bliss when ferrit and ben were on MTG's web site. well either STG stole em or Wizards got bored and let them go. Either case they haven't really had people to replace them. I don't mind Adam, and i did like Kelly when he was in there. however I really dislike the building on a budget guy... Not many new decks, just suboptimal builds of good decks because thier on a budget... Its not really to be taken seriously tho, mostly cuz they have become more gimicky than real. They are after all the official web site for a product...

The writers are representing wizards, so of course they're going to praise whatever card the marketing department wants them to preview for the upcoming set. It's no different from any employee making testamonials on a new product the company they work for is releasing.

As for the regular articles, not sure. I only read making magic these days. Some of the others either have a bland writing style, or a column that i'm just not big on. It really depends on what you like about magic. If you're into deckbuilding, building on a budget or serious fun might be useful. Limited information is a good start for those who want to better understand limited magic. Making Magic and Recent Developments are good articles for those interested in what makes magic the game it is. Savor the flavor is an article for the players who enjoy the storyline behind the game. And so on.

I'm with you on Making Magic. Despite all the flak he's copped for allegedly ruining the game, Rosewater writes great articles. Aside from that, I occasionally read Mike Flores' stuff, but mainly to keep up to date with the tier 1 decks of the format and their performances in the pro scene.

I used to love Building on a Budget, Serious Fun, and Savor the Flavor, but now I don't even bother with them (except on the rare occasion where they talk about something I'm curious about).

I never really cared for most of the articles. I just visit the page every day 11PM CNT to look at the Arcana to see if there are any cool facts or what not.

Noel's From the Lab articles are my favorite for sure. Even though he is hit or miss, he does put together some fun looking decks. :]