Your articles are G-R-E-A-T. Not Tony the Tiger like, but Good Stuff’.
Or, should I say your Stuff is l337
Seriously though’, Big Ups, Yo.
Your loving casual nub,
Apparently Eric didn’t get my e-mail. Or, maybe he wasn’t a HOUTS follower.
Member list: 1 and counting.
Hey, Eric, call me. *phone gesture*
Eric, the following article is dedicated to you..
Warning: this will be littered with clever & witty obscure references.
Just for you, Eric, I’ve decided to confess why I hate So Much on CPA.
i'v3 ph0uNd +h3 1ib3r@1 @++i+00d, miNd$3+, h@z 1i++3r3d i+$31Ph //i+hiN +h3 d33P c@vi+i3$ 0f +hi$ //3b$i+3-Phr0M m0d3r@+0r +0 r3@d3r. //hi13 m0$+ high1y 3duc@+3d iNdividu@1$, $uch @z my$31Ph, //0u1dN'+ $3c0Nd g1@Nc3 $uch @++i+00d, i h01d my$31Ph r3$P0N$ib13 +0 p0iN+ 0u+ +h3 b133diNg igN0r@Nc3. m0$+ p30P13 +@/<3 //h@+ i "//ri+3" +0 h3@r+, //hi13 +h0$3 //i+h @Ny 10gic@1 $3N$3, m3r31y $hrug 0Ph +hi$ d3M0Nic@1 di$P1@y.
What does a “HOUTS” do?
Being a loyal hater, I did my usual:
Click + wait for Mozilla to load - go to UnFavorites List – CPA Playa’s – Website.
Personal Messages of hope: 0
Hatemail: 35342343 to the 2nd power.
Community Buttkissing: 3 new replies.
Enter in random flame
Enter in loving, spiteful, comment of hope.
Real article writers=2
Idiot moderators=Hawking’s projection on universal difference
Oh, wait, what’s this? Eric Turkeyson has Something Good? <------TM
---------> “Why I am right, and you are wrong.” By Eric Tigerson
Hold on, wait, did I co-author this article? <----------------------
Anyhow, I click the blue link of death to witness the onslaught of utter wrongage’.
Eric even TM his PC article with “Defining Casual”
Nice Stuff, sir.
What I mean is….
“To the majority of Magic players, there's no distinction between being a Magic player and being a casual Magic player”
What you say?!
All your n00bs are belong to me. Make your time nubcakes. Take off your sauce.
“Casual” has been defined by the community, a common division of unity between the competitive players and the non-competitive players (“casual”).
Gee, HOUTS but isn’t a common division of unity contradicting?
However, I can’t think of a better way of explaining the magnetosphere line of these players. One side does “X”, the other does “Y”, while both do the same thing, they work completely opposite. You take the overall effect, and you have a unifying work.
“You'd think it's a profession”
Not really. A profession requires education. Not MTG education, but specialized training of education.
-BUT HOUTS, you it’s a profession if you can make a ‘living’ off of it.
Neg. Take aside Mr. Finkel & Budde, name a person who fully supports himself off this game.
And two men doth not maketh.
“Nowadays, every magic-related site panders to the tournament players.”
School of idiotology.
Maybe there is a “demand” for them. Did you ever wonder why there aren’t top-notch “Casual” sites? Why hasn’t CPA gone premium? WTFMATE?!
Would you pay X dollars a month to read Spidey’s non-sensical banter?
Or, Kai Budde?
Yeah, I’ll Budde FTW.
“They tout a win-at-all-costs mentality apparent in their leanings towards deck tech, draft strategy, and how to become a better player overall.”
Isn’t the point of this game to win? And I really am confused at the mentality as a “win-at-all-costs” you mention. I disagree with this statement. Because they aren’t promoting:
1. “How to stack your deck and win!
2. “Ignore the percentages: Play Scrubs at FNM. Get free packs!
3. Rules Lawyering Guide to Winning
4. Confuse your opponent with these Top 10 tricks.
Those would be the cynical attitude. Not the articles promoting better game play, grasp of rules, or board position.
“However, in my experience, most Magic players play for fun”
You lead your next sentence with this troublesome one. Bad idea, Ray.
What experience do you have that would color it?
Because I look at my 12 years of game experience, 5 years of card shop running, 2 years of judging, and 8 years of writing, and I don’t understand.
I’ve played with several Pro’s who all have had “fun” playing while winning.
Or, take it out. Even when they weren’t winning, they still had fun.
But they wanted to win. That is part of the game. It is the goal.
It’d be like playing Chess without any regard to playing to win, but merely having ‘fun’ shifting the pieces on the board. With out any regard to where they should go to win.
“And the only information anyone would pay for is that which will help a player earn more money.”
Eric, I love you, so I’ll be easy on you my Young One.
Go back a few years, let’s say…to the first Pro Tour. Now, do you want to say it’s “show me the money?”
Or, let’s use present day examples. If only ONE person makes it to the Pro Tour from a PTQ, then that leaves the majority in the dumper. And if an average PTQ’er never makes a Pro Tour, then why does he still compete? Moreso, why would he play?
Because he loves the game. Most of them are honest with themselves and realize that even if they did qualify, their luck would run out when they get matched up against a true opponent. Now, separate those who qualify from those who are TRULY good. The margain of MTG’ers that make the money are so minimial that it doesn’t factor into play, yet. I will say “yet” because the money events are growing, but the playing field of money makers are still, and will be, slim. Your average Joe wants to win.
If profit is the ultimate goal, you surely wouldn’t be spending an average 9-10 hours at a card shop in hopes to make the Top 8 table and win that almighty plane ticket (used to be money) and boxes of cards. I don’t see the profit in that.
“In Casual Magic, there are no banned cards because people understand what cards take the fun out of the game”
I played before the Pro Tour was around, before tournament play & rulebooks guided the players. Even then, we understood what bad cards really sucked to be played against, or what wasn’t “fun”. There is no fun in a first turn kill with Fireball + Channel. Now factor in you aren’t restricted, by your terminology, by cards.
Welcome ladies & Gentlement to you 1st turn kill on a 90 percent scale.
And I’ll only justify my actions by saying “Well, I have fun playing it…”
No, in ANY Magic game, there are just sick cards, made by WOTC, that we don’t want to see hit play.
“A Casual Magic player cannot be defined by words, but by their actions and their attitude.”
Not really. If you played against me, and a few of my friends, you’d have NO idea that we weren’t “Casual Players”.
Or, should I trademark that? I feel you have done so by making such definitions.
Casual Players TM.
“You won't find a Casual Magic player at any tournament, because once they're in it, they lose the casual player's ideals and take on the professional player's ideals”
My dear Johnny was playing with those hardened tournament boys over at the card shop. I told him to just run, run! Nothing but trouble I tell you. You can never know what they might do…
Yeah, there must be some magical zone where you change once you hit a tournament.
So, you’re saying playing a FNM isn’t “casual”?
Is it “casual” play, or playing “casually?”
I’m confused. Can you please give me a better definition? I’d hate to lose my “casual” virginity by setting foot in a tournament and actually enjoying it.
Mind-warping places I tell you.
“The fact of the matter is without casual players, there are no tournaments, because there's no money to pay the professionals.”
Actually, it goes both ways. Without both types you wouldn’t have this game. The tournament structure saves this game. It distinguishes as more than a card game you play with your friend Alberta on a Friday night while sipping on Fresco. The tournaments, and higher ones, are a breeding ground for players in which to meet. This is more important than the actual supposed ‘prize’ pool that you claim is highly dependent upon the mindset. Otherwise, this game would die away. Just a few random scrubs buying packs, playing at home, and occasionally meeting up (by region) to play.
Wow, this sounds like Dungeons & Dragons, and so many of those other games you’ve heard about. And, we all know those are so successful.
“Without casual players, the game is no longer a game; it's a competition”
This sentence isn’t only wrong, it’s absurd. You mean without competitive players, whose objective is to win, this game is no longer a game. After all, ‘winning’ isn’t the major force driving the ‘casual players’ but to have “fun”.
Don’t worry Eric, you silly bear, I realize dictionaries are hard to find at your local library.
Definition of Game: “a contest with rules to determine a winner”.
Really? To determine a winner? Well, now that dictionary is biased! It hasn’t taken in consideration of ‘casual’ games.
I mean, what is competition if it isn’t a game of it? Oh, you little philosopher Houts.
Shawn J. Houtsinger
The One and Only,
Send hate mail to: firstname.lastname@example.org