Let me get this straight: the DJ is over the line because it's something that exists in modern life, but a mechsuit, which would probably exist in the far future, is allowed? I thought the problem was DJs are too futuristic for the time period we want Magic's fantasy to be based on? Are we moving goalposts now?
As people have said multiple times now, it's not so much the concept itself, but the execution and aesthetics. It pulls you out of the world, it doesn't mesh with Magic as a whole. You can bring up as many reasons as you want, but ultimately it doesn't matter: For many people it just doesn't work.
Take a look at Kill Six Billion Demons. It meshes modern concepts with fantasy aesthetics really well. There's even a "magical" version of the internet as well as electricity and firearms. And yet it all feels like it belongs, because the author was careful not to have the characters wear headphones that look like actual existing brands with the logo removed, or just add floating magical runes to a mundane modern object like a turntable and call it a day.
]Let me get this straight: the DJ is over the line because it's something that exists in modern life, but a mechsuit, which would probably exist in the far future, is allowed? I thought the problem was DJs are too futuristic for the time period we want Magic's fantasy to be based on? Are we moving goalposts now?
Pretty sure the issue is that it's just a DJ. There's nothing fantastical about it because the fantasy elements there (the exoskeleton) is ill explained and has no reason to be there. It honestly looks like a skin from League of Legends or any other MOBA and therefore loses any identity to Magic.
If they had made that something connected to Kamigawa (make it a fox, moonfolk, or them dressed like a ninja so we can have a Ninja Bard) then I'm sure less would have an issue with it, but unfortunately it just looks like a DJ, plain as can be.
So, why don't we have more of a problem with Seller of Songbirds it's just a seller of Songbirds, something going that exists in markets throughout history.
Yeah, something that bothers me a bit is the subtle goalpost move that seems to be going on in this thread, first it is too technologically advanced, then too modern, now too mundane (which I find hilarious seeing as I have never seen a DJ using holografic technology on fire and exoskeletons before). If it is some form of emotional reaction then that's fine, but it is obvious that we had mundane things in Magic before, and this is not a mundane DJ. If you simply dislike the art or the specific combinations of elements in the picture, fine. But this is definitely not something Neon Dynasty specific and it is not a rational argument against its themes.
So, why don't we have more of a problem with Seller of Songbirds it's just a seller of Songbirds, something going that exists in markets throughout history.
Yeah, something that bothers me a bit is the subtle goalpost move that seems to be going on in this thread, first it is too technologically advanced, then too modern, now too mundane (which I find hilarious seeing as I have never seen a DJ using holografic technology on fire and exoskeletons before). If it is some form of emotional reaction then that's fine, but it is obvious that we had mundane things in Magic before, and this is not a mundane DJ. If you simply dislike the art or the specific combinations of elements in the picture, fine. But this is definitely not something Neon Dynasty specific and it is not a rational argument against its themes.
I think it's not so much "people subtly moving goalposts just to piss you off" but "people trying to explain the reasons behind their reaction." Sometimes you don't get it quite right on the first try, you know?
As SecretInfiltrator pointed out, it's not so much that there's a a line where fantasy stops being fantasy. It's more of an uncanny valley situation. On the one end you have old-timey sword and sorcery fantasy, and as you add more modern or modern-adjacent elements, you start dipping into a valley that doesn't feel far enough removed from reality to make you feel like you're in a fantasy setting (some genres, like urban fantasy, are built around this disconnect and are able to somewhat avoid this issue). But once you go past the dip, you start getting into the realm of fantasy again, because it doesn't really matter if something like a teleporter is "hard science" or magic.
As for your points:
- The mundane part about the picture is not the exoskeleton, or the fact that it's "on fire." The mundane part is the base concept (a DJ), and all the extra flair that's thrown on top does a bad job of "covering it up," so to say. (Gotta throw in another "for some people" here before I get accused of presenting my opinion as objective fact...)
- Mundaneness isn't the only factor, it has to be mundane and omnipresent in a modern-day sense to fall into the uncanny valley. Sure, Seller of Songbirds is just a merchant, pretty mundane. And I'll concur that there are plenty of pet shops in the real world. But how many pet shops have you seen that sell exclusively songbirds in 20XX? In contrast, DJs are basically everywhere, even the small city I grew up in had some. There are many more examples for this ... for example, crossbows are used even today, but you don't see people casually walking around with them. This makes it easy to make crossbows feel like they belong in a fantasy setting.
- I think dismissing everyone who's having a somewhat negative direction to this one particular art piece as irrational is a bit harsh. As I said in a previous post, there is a real reason for why the closest equivalent to real guns we've seen in modern Magic (don't bring up that one old set where they did it one time, I know it exists) is "wrist-mounted dragon cannons" and "hookshot launchers." Wizards is aware of the underlying potential for visual conflict, and is clearly acting upon it. This whole set is just an instance of WotC testing out the waters of how far they can go, and for the most part they've done a pretty good job so far (imo ... just in case). But under these conditions, some things that don't fall into the uncanny valley for some people are going to do so for others - the reaction is emtional, but there is an underlying logic to this.
So, why don't we have more of a problem with Seller of Songbirds it's just a seller of Songbirds, something going that exists in markets throughout history.
You just answered your own bit of lame literal-sy with that last bit.
Yeah, something that bothers me a bit is the subtle goalpost move that seems to be going on in this thread, first it is too technologically advanced, then too modern, now too mundane (which I find hilarious seeing as I have never seen a DJ using holografic technology on fire and exoskeletons before). If it is some form of emotional reaction then that's fine, but it is obvious that we had mundane things in Magic before, and this is not a mundane DJ. If you simply dislike the art or the specific combinations of elements in the picture, fine. But this is definitely not something Neon Dynasty specific and it is not a rational argument against its themes.
Or, and just stick with me on this 'cause it might be crazy, but the people that don't like it don't have the same reasons for doing so and therefore this "goalpost moving" you're seeing doesn't exist. It can also be that all of those issues can be true at the same time.
So, why don't we have more of a problem with Seller of Songbirds it's just a seller of Songbirds, something going that exists in markets throughout history.
You just answered your own bit of lame literal-sy with that last bit.
Yeah, something that bothers me a bit is the subtle goalpost move that seems to be going on in this thread, first it is too technologically advanced, then too modern, now too mundane (which I find hilarious seeing as I have never seen a DJ using holografic technology on fire and exoskeletons before). If it is some form of emotional reaction then that's fine, but it is obvious that we had mundane things in Magic before, and this is not a mundane DJ. If you simply dislike the art or the specific combinations of elements in the picture, fine. But this is definitely not something Neon Dynasty specific and it is not a rational argument against its themes.
Or, and just stick with me on this 'cause it might be crazy, but the people that don't like it don't have the same reasons for doing so and therefore this "goalpost moving" you're seeing doesn't exist. It can also be that all of those issues can be true at the same time.
I'm not sure that I did though. Many people who are raising objections to the DJ seem to be all about it being not bizarre enough. There are, pound for pound, more cards that are not outside of the norm then there are within the norm. Beards and muggers and mechanics and scientists and merchants make up a huge portion of commons and uncommons and even some dates. Many legends are just folks, or folks' puppies. There's a cycle of cards literally named after the street they live on. And with all that I've never seen this visceral a reaction to a citizen of the plane we are visiting.
Now, admittedly, I'm biased towards the DJ I'm a big fan of urban fantasy, when I was writing it was definitely in that vein and a lot of my recreational reading fits there too. So, I get that some people will react to the nature of the plane itself differently. I have a soft spot for Llorwyn and am not as fond of Ixalan because that's my taste.
But, leaving aside this particular DJ's fondness for adding rope to his outfit, I don't get how this one piece of card art is driving this much discussion.
Now, admittedly, I'm biased towards the DJ I'm a big fan of urban fantasy, when I was writing it was definitely in that vein and a lot of my recreational reading fits there too. So, I get that some people will react to the nature of the plane itself differently. I have a soft spot for Llorwyn and am not as fond of Ixalan because that's my taste.
But, leaving aside this particular DJ's fondness for adding rope to his outfit, I don't get how this one piece of card art is driving this much discussion.
Because when you start to think about it the art makes no sense. The exoskeleton serves no purpose, any of the fantasy in the art seems tacked and unneeded, and in no way portrays Kamigawa (past or present) in the least bit. At the very least if it was a rat or moonfolk you'd see some of that fantasy, but this looks no more Magic: the Gathering than TWD did.
Honestly, the discussion may be coming from the fact that what some were fearing about Kamigawa being more futuristic is all there in the art.
So, why don't we have more of a problem with Seller of Songbirds it's just a seller of Songbirds, something going that exists in markets throughout history.
Yeah, something that bothers me a bit is the subtle goalpost move that seems to be going on in this thread, first it is too technologically advanced, then too modern, now too mundane (which I find hilarious seeing as I have never seen a DJ using holografic technology on fire and exoskeletons before). If it is some form of emotional reaction then that's fine, but it is obvious that we had mundane things in Magic before, and this is not a mundane DJ. If you simply dislike the art or the specific combinations of elements in the picture, fine. But this is definitely not something Neon Dynasty specific and it is not a rational argument against its themes.
I think it's not so much "people subtly moving goalposts just to piss you off" but "people trying to explain the reasons behind their reaction." Sometimes you don't get it quite right on the first try, you know?
As SecretInfiltrator pointed out, it's not so much that there's a a line where fantasy stops being fantasy. It's more of an uncanny valley situation. On the one end you have old-timey sword and sorcery fantasy, and as you add more modern or modern-adjacent elements, you start dipping into a valley that doesn't feel far enough removed from reality to make you feel like you're in a fantasy setting (some genres, like urban fantasy, are built around this disconnect and are able to somewhat avoid this issue). But once you go past the dip, you start getting into the realm of fantasy again, because it doesn't really matter if something like a teleporter is "hard science" or magic.
As for your points:
- The mundane part about the picture is not the exoskeleton, or the fact that it's "on fire." The mundane part is the base concept (a DJ), and all the extra flair that's thrown on top does a bad job of "covering it up," so to say. (Gotta throw in another "for some people" here before I get accused of presenting my opinion as objective fact...)
- Mundaneness isn't the only factor, it has to be mundane and omnipresent in a modern-day sense to fall into the uncanny valley. Sure, Seller of Songbirds is just a merchant, pretty mundane. And I'll concur that there are plenty of pet shops in the real world. But how many pet shops have you seen that sell exclusively songbirds in 20XX? In contrast, DJs are basically everywhere, even the small city I grew up in had some. There are many more examples for this ... for example, crossbows are used even today, but you don't see people casually walking around with them. This makes it easy to make crossbows feel like they belong in a fantasy setting.
- I think dismissing everyone who's having a somewhat negative direction to this one particular art piece as irrational is a bit harsh. As I said in a previous post, there is a real reason for why the closest equivalent to real guns we've seen in modern Magic (don't bring up that one old set where they did it one time, I know it exists) is "wrist-mounted dragon cannons" and "hookshot launchers." Wizards is aware of the underlying potential for visual conflict, and is clearly acting upon it. This whole set is just an instance of WotC testing out the waters of how far they can go, and for the most part they've done a pretty good job so far (imo ... just in case). But under these conditions, some things that don't fall into the uncanny valley for some people are going to do so for others - the reaction is emtional, but there is an underlying logic to this.
It's not dismissive, it's descriptive.
An underlying logic that doesn't actually work for everyone (since there are people like me who don't agree with this uncannny valley effect explanation and also don't feel it) is still irrational. There are no objective reasons for it, that's all that means. A rational argument would work without subjective feelings. And that's ok, I am not saying that an irrational argument can't have merit, but it also only has that for the people feeling like this.
And my bad if I misinterpreted it as goalpost moving, just felt that way because the same people gave these different answers over time and didn't really answer to my objections to them (or simply dismissed them). But you are right, it could be that they simply have trouble describing the problem.
I personally don't feel your points, but it's ok. I guess we simply have to agree to disagree.
Now, admittedly, I'm biased towards the DJ I'm a big fan of urban fantasy, when I was writing it was definitely in that vein and a lot of my recreational reading fits there too. So, I get that some people will react to the nature of the plane itself differently. I have a soft spot for Llorwyn and am not as fond of Ixalan because that's my taste.
But, leaving aside this particular DJ's fondness for adding rope to his outfit, I don't get how this one piece of card art is driving this much discussion.
Because when you start to think about it the art makes no sense. The exoskeleton serves no purpose, any of the fantasy in the art seems tacked and unneeded, and in no way portrays Kamigawa (past or present) in the least bit. At the very least if it was a rat or moonfolk you'd see some of that fantasy, but this looks no more Magic: the Gathering than TWD did.
Honestly, the discussion may be coming from the fact that what some were fearing about Kamigawa being more futuristic is all there in the art.
But it doesn't need to make sense. He's a DJ how does wearing a giant marshmallow or mouse head or a bucket of KFC as a hat make you a better performer?
But I do see your point about this being more a catalyst for a conversation that was bound to happen rather than the problem itself.
“There are no weak Jews. I am descended from those who wrestle angels and kill giants. We were chosen by God. You were chosen by a pathetic little man who can't seem to grow a full mustache"
"You can tell how dumb someone is by how they use Mary Sue"
]Let me get this straight: the DJ is over the line because it's something that exists in modern life, but a mechsuit, which would probably exist in the far future, is allowed? I thought the problem was DJs are too futuristic for the time period we want Magic's fantasy to be based on? Are we moving goalposts now?
Pretty sure the issue is that it's just a DJ. There's nothing fantastical about it because the fantasy elements there (the exoskeleton) is ill explained and has no reason to be there. It honestly looks like a skin from League of Legends or any other MOBA and therefore loses any identity to Magic.
If they had made that something connected to Kamigawa (make it a fox, moonfolk, or them dressed like a ninja so we can have a Ninja Bard) then I'm sure less would have an issue with it, but unfortunately it just looks like a DJ, plain as can be.
So, why don't we have more of a problem with Seller of Songbirds it's just a seller of Songbirds, something going that exists in markets throughout history.
And Portal 3 Kingdoms, the most mundane set ever. The only world where's literally zero magic because based on a historical real world novel. Even the sorceries just depicts extremely mundane acts and I never seen any vorthos tearing their clothes because In one game I just deciced of Borrowing 100,000 Arrows instead of doing a more magical Theft of Dreams lol
It's not dismissive, it's descriptive.
An underlying logic that doesn't actually work for everyone (since there are people like me who don't agree with this uncannny valley effect explanation and also don't feel it) is still irrational. There are no objective reasons for it, that's all that means. A rational argument would work without subjective feelings. And that's ok, I am not saying that an irrational argument can't have merit, but it also only has that for the people feeling like this.
And my bad if I misinterpreted it as goalpost moving, just felt that way because the same people gave these different answers over time and didn't really answer to my objections to them (or simply dismissed them). But you are right, it could be that they simply have trouble describing the problem.
I personally don't feel your points, but it's ok. I guess we simply have to agree to disagree.
I guess we do. You're using a very scientific definition of logic, where something built on it has be reproduceable for 100% of the people. I'm not sure how much merit this has considering the thing we are talking about ... art, which is inherently subjective (and even MtG game design in a broader sense, which has a lot more technical aspects, is often influenced by how designers or playtesters feel about stuff). When I'm using "logic" here, I mean "a well-reasoned description of cause and effect that resonates with the biggest possible amount of people who are having a certain reaction to something." (Which does seem to fit your "descriptive" comment.) The traditional uncanny valley effect (related to human-like robots/androids/etc.) is generally accepted as "a thing," but I bet that there are people out there who don't get it at all. We're not talking about an exact science here, but if that's what you meant with "irrational" I can accept that.
Edit: I'm still kind of curious how the people that are fine with the DJ art would react to a card art featuring a weapon that is, in terms of outward appearance, a real-world glock, but shoots little fireballs instead of bullets ... and its user is wearing some big pauldron fantasy armor.
It's not dismissive, it's descriptive.
An underlying logic that doesn't actually work for everyone (since there are people like me who don't agree with this uncannny valley effect explanation and also don't feel it) is still irrational. There are no objective reasons for it, that's all that means. A rational argument would work without subjective feelings. And that's ok, I am not saying that an irrational argument can't have merit, but it also only has that for the people feeling like this.
And my bad if I misinterpreted it as goalpost moving, just felt that way because the same people gave these different answers over time and didn't really answer to my objections to them (or simply dismissed them). But you are right, it could be that they simply have trouble describing the problem.
I personally don't feel your points, but it's ok. I guess we simply have to agree to disagree.
I guess we do. You're using a very scientific definition of logic, where something built on it has be reproduceable for 100% of the people. I'm not sure how much merit this has considering the thing we are talking about ... art, which is inherently subjective (and even MtG game design in a broader sense, which has a lot more technical aspects, is often influenced by how designers or playtesters feel about stuff). When I'm using "logic" here, I mean "a well-reasoned description of cause and effect that resonates with the biggest possible amount of people who are having a certain reaction to something." (Which does seem to fit your "descriptive" comment.) The traditional uncanny valley effect (related to human-like robots/androids/etc.) is generally accepted as "a thing," but I bet that there are people out there who don't get it at all. We're not talking about an exact science here, but if that's what you meant with "irrational" I can accept that.
Edit: I'm still kind of curious how the people that are fine with the DJ art would react to a card art featuring a weapon that is, in terms of outward appearance, a real-world glock, but shoots little fireballs instead of bullets ... and its user is wearing some big pauldron fantasy armor.
We very well may see exactly that in New Capenna. I guess we will see how we feel about it then
It's not dismissive, it's descriptive.
An underlying logic that doesn't actually work for everyone (since there are people like me who don't agree with this uncannny valley effect explanation and also don't feel it) is still irrational. There are no objective reasons for it, that's all that means. A rational argument would work without subjective feelings. And that's ok, I am not saying that an irrational argument can't have merit, but it also only has that for the people feeling like this.
And my bad if I misinterpreted it as goalpost moving, just felt that way because the same people gave these different answers over time and didn't really answer to my objections to them (or simply dismissed them). But you are right, it could be that they simply have trouble describing the problem.
I personally don't feel your points, but it's ok. I guess we simply have to agree to disagree.
I guess we do. You're using a very scientific definition of logic, where something built on it has be reproduceable for 100% of the people. I'm not sure how much merit this has considering the thing we are talking about ... art, which is inherently subjective (and even MtG game design in a broader sense, which has a lot more technical aspects, is often influenced by how designers or playtesters feel about stuff). When I'm using "logic" here, I mean "a well-reasoned description of cause and effect that resonates with the biggest possible amount of people who are having a certain reaction to something." (Which does seem to fit your "descriptive" comment.) The traditional uncanny valley effect (related to human-like robots/androids/etc.) is generally accepted as "a thing," but I bet that there are people out there who don't get it at all. We're not talking about an exact science here, but if that's what you meant with "irrational" I can accept that.
Edit: I'm still kind of curious how the people that are fine with the DJ art would react to a card art featuring a weapon that is, in terms of outward appearance, a real-world glock, but shoots little fireballs instead of bullets ... and its user is wearing some big pauldron fantasy armor.
That's what I meant.
I would have nothing against firearms in Magic. They wouldn't even have to make it that 'magic-y'. The crossbows of Innistrad were pretty normal looking too after all. I always thought of these lines as rather arbitrary. In a wild west world I would actually love if they get over their gun-phobia. I would appreciate it if they made the guns a bit more fantastic than normal guns, but the whole 'guns are absolutely the line that must not be crossed' thing is weird. They do have to fit the world in which they appear though (as I said, wild west for example). Again, this is my opinion, and I understand that other people feel different. But these are not hard, objective lines that somehow define what is fantasy or acceptable in Magic and what is not. It's people's opinions and tastes, and those can as we all know differ wildly.
It does though. Even within the context of itself it makes no sense. All of the "fantasy" that's on display here is superfluous and is just there because it had to be rather than it showing us anything about what Kamigawa has become. Maybe if the turntable was 20 feet wide and the exoskeleton was 6 arms to do it all then it would be something, but here it's just....why can't that person do it normally? It all comes back to the purpose of much of everything in the art.
It does though. Even within the context of itself it makes no sense. All of the "fantasy" that's on display here is superfluous and is just there because it had to be rather than it showing us anything about what Kamigawa has become. Maybe if the turntable was 20 feet wide and the exoskeleton was 6 arms to do it all then it would be something, but here it's just....why can't that person do it normally? It all comes back to the purpose of much of everything in the art.
But, it doesn't, not really. This is character art. And this character is comfortable not making any sense.
Edit: I'm still kind of curious how the people that are fine with the DJ art would react to a card art featuring a weapon that is, in terms of outward appearance, a real-world glock, but shoots little fireballs instead of bullets ... and its user is wearing some big pauldron fantasy armor.
I'd probably end up being fine about and silent regarding that, too. ...I'm still predicting phonographs in New Capenna.
(It might be all that Nintendo video games influencing me towards being tolerant in general, what with the Mario series letting Mario use PDAs and go to space without a spacesuit yet also fight dragons and evil alien androids (I personally think the Mario-verse is essentially modern-day with some fantasy and sci-fi elements) and the Kirby series involving cellphones, shower caps, more dragons and robots, ghosts, high-tech spaceships, cheap space travel without spacesuits (implied to already be available for cheap centuries to even millennia ago), and even space wizards and space wizard-knights (I personally think the Kirby-verse is more schizo-tech science fantasy).)
On another topic, as much as I'm willing to joke about the latest Sylvan Safekeeper art being of a weaponless wizard non-warrior in full plate armour, at least Wizards isn't following the usual wizard clothing trope there, right?
Edit: I'm still kind of curious how the people that are fine with the DJ art would react to a card art featuring a weapon that is, in terms of outward appearance, a real-world glock, but shoots little fireballs instead of bullets ... and its user is wearing some big pauldron fantasy armor.
I look forward to seeing people argument for the Taylor Swift Legendary Creature card in a suit dual wielding glocks while driving a Tesla is in fact very Magic lol
Well, the reason I do not like it is it feels like it is out of League of Legends. Yes, I get we have stupid *NEON* everywhere but this art looks like it's from a completely different game. Stylistically. It's a ******* cartoon character. It's at 11. Too much.
But, it doesn't, not really. This is character art. And this character is comfortable not making any sense.
But it's not up to the character, it's up to WotC to make the world and the characters in it make sense. This character makes no sense even within this new Kamigawa and doesn't make sense with what we see in the art alone. No matter how you look at it it doesn't make sense.
But, it doesn't, not really. This is character art. And this character is comfortable not making any sense.
But it's not up to the character, it's up to WotC to make the world and the characters in it make sense. This character makes no sense even within this new Kamigawa and doesn't make sense with what we see in the art alone. No matter how you look at it it doesn't make sense.
I totally get what you are saying but I have a different experience of this artwork. I totally could see some person living in a magical cyberpunk land trying to live his dream of being a DJ and building this costume for his stage show. That's my experience of this artwork. And it's totally cool that different people have a different experience.
I'm okay with some stuff missing the mark of that's what it takes for WoTC to experiment with broader options.
I wonder if part of the discomfort is the fact that MtG is a multi-world kind of story, with an explicit premise of cross-contamination between planes. It's one thing when a primary component is people or magic, those aren't necessarily replicatable, but when items are introduced, it suddenly feels a lot weirder. Sure, this DJ feels like a character that exists on the new Kamigawa, but how would it look if that turntable showed up on Innistrad? If a world with guns got introduced, there would no doubt be a Planeswalker to go with it, so how would they be looked upon on Kaladesh? Would Kaladesh end up making guns too? Ravnica seems to be the exception in a lot of ways, as it seems to embody the concept of "anything can happen in the city" and it was built with mass diversity in mind.
I wonder if this juxtaposition strangeness is why certain Planeswalkers don't show up outside of their homes very often. We've yet to see Saheeli anywhere beyond Kaladesh and Ravnica, for example.
Edit: I'm still kind of curious how the people that are fine with the DJ art would react to a card art featuring a weapon that is, in terms of outward appearance, a real-world glock, but shoots little fireballs instead of bullets ... and its user is wearing some big pauldron fantasy armor.
I look forward to seeing people argument for the Taylor Swift Legendary Creature card in a suit dual wielding glocks while driving a Tesla is in fact very Magic lol
"Well Fleetwheel Cruiser from Kaladesh already kind of looked like a car that would be made by Tesla, I'm fine with this. Just print whatever, having guidelines for your fantasy franchise is so 1993"
Edit: I'm still kind of curious how the people that are fine with the DJ art would react to a card art featuring a weapon that is, in terms of outward appearance, a real-world glock, but shoots little fireballs instead of bullets ... and its user is wearing some big pauldron fantasy armor.
I love final Fantasy, Yuna needs a gun more often.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“There are no weak Jews. I am descended from those who wrestle angels and kill giants. We were chosen by God. You were chosen by a pathetic little man who can't seem to grow a full mustache"
"You can tell how dumb someone is by how they use Mary Sue"
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
As people have said multiple times now, it's not so much the concept itself, but the execution and aesthetics. It pulls you out of the world, it doesn't mesh with Magic as a whole. You can bring up as many reasons as you want, but ultimately it doesn't matter: For many people it just doesn't work.
Take a look at Kill Six Billion Demons. It meshes modern concepts with fantasy aesthetics really well. There's even a "magical" version of the internet as well as electricity and firearms. And yet it all feels like it belongs, because the author was careful not to have the characters wear headphones that look like actual existing brands with the logo removed, or just add floating magical runes to a mundane modern object like a turntable and call it a day.
Yeah, something that bothers me a bit is the subtle goalpost move that seems to be going on in this thread, first it is too technologically advanced, then too modern, now too mundane (which I find hilarious seeing as I have never seen a DJ using holografic technology on fire and exoskeletons before). If it is some form of emotional reaction then that's fine, but it is obvious that we had mundane things in Magic before, and this is not a mundane DJ. If you simply dislike the art or the specific combinations of elements in the picture, fine. But this is definitely not something Neon Dynasty specific and it is not a rational argument against its themes.
As SecretInfiltrator pointed out, it's not so much that there's a a line where fantasy stops being fantasy. It's more of an uncanny valley situation. On the one end you have old-timey sword and sorcery fantasy, and as you add more modern or modern-adjacent elements, you start dipping into a valley that doesn't feel far enough removed from reality to make you feel like you're in a fantasy setting (some genres, like urban fantasy, are built around this disconnect and are able to somewhat avoid this issue). But once you go past the dip, you start getting into the realm of fantasy again, because it doesn't really matter if something like a teleporter is "hard science" or magic.
As for your points:
- The mundane part about the picture is not the exoskeleton, or the fact that it's "on fire." The mundane part is the base concept (a DJ), and all the extra flair that's thrown on top does a bad job of "covering it up," so to say. (Gotta throw in another "for some people" here before I get accused of presenting my opinion as objective fact...)
- Mundaneness isn't the only factor, it has to be mundane and omnipresent in a modern-day sense to fall into the uncanny valley. Sure, Seller of Songbirds is just a merchant, pretty mundane. And I'll concur that there are plenty of pet shops in the real world. But how many pet shops have you seen that sell exclusively songbirds in 20XX? In contrast, DJs are basically everywhere, even the small city I grew up in had some. There are many more examples for this ... for example, crossbows are used even today, but you don't see people casually walking around with them. This makes it easy to make crossbows feel like they belong in a fantasy setting.
- I think dismissing everyone who's having a somewhat negative direction to this one particular art piece as irrational is a bit harsh. As I said in a previous post, there is a real reason for why the closest equivalent to real guns we've seen in modern Magic (don't bring up that one old set where they did it one time, I know it exists) is "wrist-mounted dragon cannons" and "hookshot launchers." Wizards is aware of the underlying potential for visual conflict, and is clearly acting upon it. This whole set is just an instance of WotC testing out the waters of how far they can go, and for the most part they've done a pretty good job so far (imo ... just in case). But under these conditions, some things that don't fall into the uncanny valley for some people are going to do so for others - the reaction is emtional, but there is an underlying logic to this.
You just answered your own bit of lame literal-sy with that last bit.
Or, and just stick with me on this 'cause it might be crazy, but the people that don't like it don't have the same reasons for doing so and therefore this "goalpost moving" you're seeing doesn't exist. It can also be that all of those issues can be true at the same time.
I'm not sure that I did though. Many people who are raising objections to the DJ seem to be all about it being not bizarre enough. There are, pound for pound, more cards that are not outside of the norm then there are within the norm. Beards and muggers and mechanics and scientists and merchants make up a huge portion of commons and uncommons and even some dates. Many legends are just folks, or folks' puppies. There's a cycle of cards literally named after the street they live on. And with all that I've never seen this visceral a reaction to a citizen of the plane we are visiting.
Now, admittedly, I'm biased towards the DJ I'm a big fan of urban fantasy, when I was writing it was definitely in that vein and a lot of my recreational reading fits there too. So, I get that some people will react to the nature of the plane itself differently. I have a soft spot for Llorwyn and am not as fond of Ixalan because that's my taste.
But, leaving aside this particular DJ's fondness for adding rope to his outfit, I don't get how this one piece of card art is driving this much discussion.
Because when you start to think about it the art makes no sense. The exoskeleton serves no purpose, any of the fantasy in the art seems tacked and unneeded, and in no way portrays Kamigawa (past or present) in the least bit. At the very least if it was a rat or moonfolk you'd see some of that fantasy, but this looks no more Magic: the Gathering than TWD did.
Honestly, the discussion may be coming from the fact that what some were fearing about Kamigawa being more futuristic is all there in the art.
It's not dismissive, it's descriptive.
An underlying logic that doesn't actually work for everyone (since there are people like me who don't agree with this uncannny valley effect explanation and also don't feel it) is still irrational. There are no objective reasons for it, that's all that means. A rational argument would work without subjective feelings. And that's ok, I am not saying that an irrational argument can't have merit, but it also only has that for the people feeling like this.
And my bad if I misinterpreted it as goalpost moving, just felt that way because the same people gave these different answers over time and didn't really answer to my objections to them (or simply dismissed them). But you are right, it could be that they simply have trouble describing the problem.
I personally don't feel your points, but it's ok. I guess we simply have to agree to disagree.
But it doesn't need to make sense. He's a DJ how does wearing a giant marshmallow or mouse head or a bucket of KFC as a hat make you a better performer?
But I do see your point about this being more a catalyst for a conversation that was bound to happen rather than the problem itself.
"You can tell how dumb someone is by how they use Mary Sue"
And Portal 3 Kingdoms, the most mundane set ever. The only world where's literally zero magic because based on a historical real world novel. Even the sorceries just depicts extremely mundane acts and I never seen any vorthos tearing their clothes because In one game I just deciced of Borrowing 100,000 Arrows instead of doing a more magical Theft of Dreams lol
Edit: I'm still kind of curious how the people that are fine with the DJ art would react to a card art featuring a weapon that is, in terms of outward appearance, a real-world glock, but shoots little fireballs instead of bullets ... and its user is wearing some big pauldron fantasy armor.
We very well may see exactly that in New Capenna. I guess we will see how we feel about it then
That's what I meant.
I would have nothing against firearms in Magic. They wouldn't even have to make it that 'magic-y'. The crossbows of Innistrad were pretty normal looking too after all. I always thought of these lines as rather arbitrary. In a wild west world I would actually love if they get over their gun-phobia. I would appreciate it if they made the guns a bit more fantastic than normal guns, but the whole 'guns are absolutely the line that must not be crossed' thing is weird. They do have to fit the world in which they appear though (as I said, wild west for example). Again, this is my opinion, and I understand that other people feel different. But these are not hard, objective lines that somehow define what is fantasy or acceptable in Magic and what is not. It's people's opinions and tastes, and those can as we all know differ wildly.
It does though. Even within the context of itself it makes no sense. All of the "fantasy" that's on display here is superfluous and is just there because it had to be rather than it showing us anything about what Kamigawa has become. Maybe if the turntable was 20 feet wide and the exoskeleton was 6 arms to do it all then it would be something, but here it's just....why can't that person do it normally? It all comes back to the purpose of much of everything in the art.
But, it doesn't, not really. This is character art. And this character is comfortable not making any sense.
I'd probably end up being fine about and silent regarding that, too. ...I'm still predicting phonographs in New Capenna.
(It might be all that Nintendo video games influencing me towards being tolerant in general, what with the Mario series letting Mario use PDAs and go to space without a spacesuit yet also fight dragons and evil alien androids (I personally think the Mario-verse is essentially modern-day with some fantasy and sci-fi elements) and the Kirby series involving cellphones, shower caps, more dragons and robots, ghosts, high-tech spaceships, cheap space travel without spacesuits (implied to already be available for cheap centuries to even millennia ago), and even space wizards and space wizard-knights (I personally think the Kirby-verse is more schizo-tech science fantasy).)
On another topic, as much as I'm willing to joke about the latest Sylvan Safekeeper art being of a weaponless wizard non-warrior in full plate armour, at least Wizards isn't following the usual wizard clothing trope there, right?
I look forward to seeing people argument for the Taylor Swift Legendary Creature card in a suit dual wielding glocks while driving a Tesla is in fact very Magic lol
Can people still like it? Sure. I do not.
Fully-powered 600-Card "Dream Cube" https://cubecobra.com/cube/list/dreamcube
450-Card "Artificer's Cube" https://cubecobra.com/cube/list/artificer
Cubing in Indianapolis...send me a PM!!
But it's not up to the character, it's up to WotC to make the world and the characters in it make sense. This character makes no sense even within this new Kamigawa and doesn't make sense with what we see in the art alone. No matter how you look at it it doesn't make sense.
I totally get what you are saying but I have a different experience of this artwork. I totally could see some person living in a magical cyberpunk land trying to live his dream of being a DJ and building this costume for his stage show. That's my experience of this artwork. And it's totally cool that different people have a different experience.
I'm okay with some stuff missing the mark of that's what it takes for WoTC to experiment with broader options.
Maybe but it was the first word that came to mind. But the rest of my point stands.
I wonder if this juxtaposition strangeness is why certain Planeswalkers don't show up outside of their homes very often. We've yet to see Saheeli anywhere beyond Kaladesh and Ravnica, for example.
I love final Fantasy, Yuna needs a gun more often.
"You can tell how dumb someone is by how they use Mary Sue"