Here is the point I am trying to make and then I will quit.

I have not in any way meant to imply that the IP is not important. Me saying that would be like Michael Jacob saying it's not all about winning and then humbly bowing respectfully to his opponent.

What I am saying is that turning up your nose at potential properties--any potential property--because you personally do not feel they don't match the flavor of the game when the game is in the state that it is strikes me as very shortsighted. As I said before, Vs is a game engine; it is not the game itself. So what happens if you go to Hobby League and they're playing the now-broken Sailor Moon/Michael Myers build? the same thing I do when I play against a Fated Quicksilver: I have fun. I am not willing to let other people's preferences and playstyles overwhelm my enjoyment of the game. And though it may be an oversimplification in some respects, that's where I stand, because I feel very fortunate to have this game at all. Fanboy properties in all their varieties are mutable to the point of endless variation and combinations. I'm not using your own words to be #####y, but to prove a point: you said yourself that your opinion of Transformers might change after the new movie. We're ultimately talking about personal preference in any placeholder we use, and as long as UDE continues to make cards based on the IP I am interested in, Small Soldiers Vs or Little Nemo Vs or La Blue Girl Vs doesn't bother me in the slightest, because I seriously doubt any extraneous IP could dominate what has come before it.

Again, it's a theoretical example. We're debating the merits of nonsuperhero properties entering the Vs fray.

Not to mention any and all of those alternate VS IPs might bring in a kick ### new card to incorporate into the Marvel or DC milieu.

The more properties the better.

If a Grey's Anatomy Essential Collection will get women to play VS... bring that 5-drop McDreamy on!

...

is that actually the name of a character on Grey's Anatomy? :p

More or less, yes.

I agree with bendrix and Erik, the more the merrier. I think this will keep more poeple interested in the long run.

That is... magnificent. I adore that string of words. Incredible.

One thing that is becoming interesting to me, since I have been building my virtual vomit in the Konami game, is how many good cards are DC. I know quite a few people who like to play only one brand, and before Vs. System it would have been blasphemy to do what we do with these myths.

I don't care which characters or mythos they pick, they are going to have to run into hoards of Wild Sentinels, Anti-Green Lanterns, Infernal Minions, Damn Nazis, and Multiple Men in my house.

It's a beautiful thing.

As a sidenote, I find it odd that on one thread I'm arguing against people who want to add as many off-property and off-theme (non-comic, non-superhero) teams to the game as possible in order to attract new players through properties, and on another thread I'm arguing against people who don't want the game to print anymore new teams at all for the sake of ensuring that a particular handful of iconic-comic teams remains as competitive as possible.

One element to keep in mind that with any liscense comes increased costs ...

Also, multiple properties would aggrevate the same problem other people already describe in terms of an 'overload' of teams ... especially as nearly EVERY non-DC/non-Marvel team would be limited to a single EC. This definately wouldn't help the secondary market.

And while generic cards can help [not to mention cool teams to team-up with like Hellboy working well with the X-Statix and Hellfire Club, etc] there would never be direct support for those ECs. Thus, the retention of players that played ONLY because of these ECs would be questionable. Especially if the transition from playing with the EC to playing with the DC/Marvel super heroes isn't likely or organic.

You can create a Vs. system of Matlock [using an absurd example] and get a bunch of 50+'ers to play the game. However, getting them to play DC/Marvel sets may not be easy [sure, some may see their Silver/Golden age heroes and go there, but the cross over isn't necessarily huge].

While any number of lisences could be used for ECs ... it's not going to change what the sets are. DC and Marvel are what Vs. sets are ... ECs allow for other things to come in with a small quarter set or so. However, those are going to be single hits ... outside of a second EC, it's unlikely they'll be revisited. So, any liscence that gets people INTO the game ... they have to be converted to purchasing DC and Marvel sets every 3 months ...

To that extent, since you can only really do so many ECs ... it's best to make the choice of liscenses in a strategic way ... maximizing properties that will BOTH attract people that may not have played the game before but would have a a crossover of fans that would be interested in a DC/Marvel card game.

Maybe I should hire WaKo to do all my posts for me, since he's much better at putting this stuff into words than I am.

Grey's Anatomy, what drivel, always reminds me that comics are truly a higher artform than TV.

I agree with Stu's previous comment that Hellboy was pitch perfect...great art, good teams, good links to the greater game...I am open to other such ECs if carried out as well...hopefully Wildstorm. And as a side note any set that has Validus, Tharok, and The Persuader simply has to be good.

What I really love about the game though is the cards just don't play themselves...you can easily mess up an advantage you obtained through drawing by playing badly.

chao

In that case, the solution might be to sacrifice DC/Marvel for greater things. Say if they acquire a Squaresoft/Enix license, the game might lose a couple hundred comic book fans, but in return it gained a couple thousand new players. In this case, the net gain of players is good for the game.
To put it bluntly, we might very well have to sacrifice some of you guys in order to rejuvenate the game.
To put it more bluntly, in order for the game to survive, Access must die!!
:mad:

Well, I'm sure UDE would be willing to do some retooling if it proved beneficial for them to shake up the 2 Marvel/2 DC sets a year scheme. I imagine this was done because those were the only 2 licenses they got, or inquired about, could afford, or whatever, at least at first.

As time goes on, it may prove profitable to delve into other properties. I know there's a boatload of Marvel/DC stuff to get through, but is it really all worth getting to? I know, I know, the comic guys are screaming. Hey, I used to collect comics, and the fact is, not every comic character is marketable.

However, there are other properties out there that are marketable, and would fit into the Vs engine quite nicely. I don't think UDE should acquire other licenses, but I also don't think it's a bad idea. Keeping the game fresh with additional licenses can't be a bad thing. Expenses and practicality may make it an unlikely thing, but that doesn't make it a bad thing.

I know I said I'd shut up, and I knew even as I typed it that I wouldn't. I'm a stone-cold lying b!tch. What can I say? Just wanted to reiterate that I'm for nonsuperhero sets only to the extent they could help the game. If they wouldn't, as WaKo surmises, then of course I'm against them.

My sole point of contention was that "It shouldn't be in the game because Optimus Prime and Dr. Strange could never be buddies" is individual personal preference, not a game-shattering prospect, and such an individual preference shouldn't be expected to be the sole reason UDE decides whether or not to adopt any purely hypothetical IPs.