Never going home
February 4th 2009 04:03
Just now that I am older, it occurs to me
I was singing in the grandest opry.
-- "Mama’s Opry" (Iris DeMent and the Nitty Gritty Dirt Band)
You never forget your first day of school, your first car, and your first Magic set (among other firsts). For instance, my first Magic experience was with the Fourth Edition of the core set. I still have fond memories of those days, even though by modern standards it was way too large, way too unfocused, and way too powerful.
Now, among the many “important” questions grappled with on the Magic-playing internet is which of the many sets released so far is the best. Of course, this is a ridiculous thing to waste so much time and energy and flamewars on, the main reason being that there is no objective way to define “best.” Every set contributed a roughly equal proportion of its cards to competitive constructed. Every set contributed a roughly equal proportion of its cards to casual play. Every set had about the same quality of art and flavor – an equal amount of effort was put into it by the creative department and the artists, even if parts of it are not to any one person’s taste.
Taste - there’s a word that appears again and again when discussing Magic, and which will continue to do so until the day the game becomes unprofitable. With so many sets, so many cards, so many decks, the chance that someone will find at least one thing that is to their taste approaches 100% as time goes by. In the context of the “best set” debate (as well as the “best card,” “best art,” and “best format” debates), most people find it impossible to separate “best” from “my favorite.”
What does all this have to do with where in the timeline someone started playing? For many people, their first set remains the most memorable, regardless of how long they keep playing or how many sets they experience. Just as I can’t entirely write off the Fourth Edition in spite of the fact that it would probably get someone fired if it was released this June, others find it hard to imagine anything surpassing the set that opened their eyes to the wonders of the multiverse of Dominia. Next time you read or hear someone spouting that Ravnica was the be-all and end-all of Magic, check the date they joined the forum (or ask them when they started playing). I’d bet that more than half the time, the date they tell you will be within about six months of October 7th, 2005.
And because of that, don’t take their word on it – or on anything else. We may all play with the same cards, but your experience is yours alone. Magic is something different to everyone, and that’s one of the reasons it is so singularly successful.
I was singing in the grandest opry.
-- "Mama’s Opry" (Iris DeMent and the Nitty Gritty Dirt Band)
You never forget your first day of school, your first car, and your first Magic set (among other firsts). For instance, my first Magic experience was with the Fourth Edition of the core set. I still have fond memories of those days, even though by modern standards it was way too large, way too unfocused, and way too powerful.
One of these cards has put in a number of decks that can be counted on one hand. The other is banned in every format. Both of them were in the Fourth Edition.
Now, among the many “important” questions grappled with on the Magic-playing internet is which of the many sets released so far is the best. Of course, this is a ridiculous thing to waste so much time and energy and flamewars on, the main reason being that there is no objective way to define “best.” Every set contributed a roughly equal proportion of its cards to competitive constructed. Every set contributed a roughly equal proportion of its cards to casual play. Every set had about the same quality of art and flavor – an equal amount of effort was put into it by the creative department and the artists, even if parts of it are not to any one person’s taste.
Taste - there’s a word that appears again and again when discussing Magic, and which will continue to do so until the day the game becomes unprofitable. With so many sets, so many cards, so many decks, the chance that someone will find at least one thing that is to their taste approaches 100% as time goes by. In the context of the “best set” debate (as well as the “best card,” “best art,” and “best format” debates), most people find it impossible to separate “best” from “my favorite.”
Someone's idea of fun.
What does all this have to do with where in the timeline someone started playing? For many people, their first set remains the most memorable, regardless of how long they keep playing or how many sets they experience. Just as I can’t entirely write off the Fourth Edition in spite of the fact that it would probably get someone fired if it was released this June, others find it hard to imagine anything surpassing the set that opened their eyes to the wonders of the multiverse of Dominia. Next time you read or hear someone spouting that Ravnica was the be-all and end-all of Magic, check the date they joined the forum (or ask them when they started playing). I’d bet that more than half the time, the date they tell you will be within about six months of October 7th, 2005.
And because of that, don’t take their word on it – or on anything else. We may all play with the same cards, but your experience is yours alone. Magic is something different to everyone, and that’s one of the reasons it is so singularly successful.
| 38 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
