I'll forego the esoteric and treacle-sweet triteness of the common VS article/post and bring us to the body of this letter.

I think we are geeks. We are dorks, nerds, in some cases freakazoids, in many cases very late for a shower, but in all but the rarest of examples we are misfits in at least a context. We are outsiders. The typical outsider is very familiar with the imposed pressures of "in" and "out", and those of welcome and not. Be this foreign to you, perhaps you should go crank up the Top 40 and stare at your cosmetically perfect face in the mirror for a while because you are not my target readership.
One can notice the establishing of "Popular Players" (credit to Niño DeRosa for that distinction) in VS now as has been the trend in other money-game franchises of the past. Does that word - popular - strike anyone else at an odd angle? Does such a trend aid in the gestation of the same cliqueish tendencies that are such harridans to those franchises? Do we risk frankensteining together our own Sect of Coolness whose existance is more than kindof alienating to the average dork, like me?

Acknowledge peoples acheivements by all means. "Praise the good of other man for good mans sake," (credit to Mr. Greg Graffin for that one). But the celebrity gamer junk just has to go.

In case you were wondering, yes, this article has alot to do with the fact that Spears' oily planetarium head is on the VSRealms mainpage not once (which prompted me to consider a letter like this) but twice (which admittedly pushed me over the edge).

Thank you for your time.

-L

I look up to Dave Spears.







Not because I believe he is better than me at this game ...









Not because I know he has more sex with Adam Prosak than I do ...









Not because he can lay the Alabama smack-down ...









But because he is taller than me. :rolleyes:

I could see how seeing Dave's face multiple times on one screen is a little mind blowing.

Just imagine! The intensity of being in the same room with him for extended periods of time, Dave constantly smacking you in the face with his extreme popularity and aura like a 100 pound tuna.

Well I just couldn't take the pressure anymore, those red nikes were just too tempting!

"The Dave" would asuredly have me comit ritual suicide if he knew I was talking about such things.

No, in all seriousness what is going on is really simple.
Dave likes to play VS, and he likes to write about VS as well. If you can't appreciate that, then maybe thats your problem.

I really think the idea that everyone who plays vs is an outcast and so we need to keep everyone an outcast within our community doesn't make alot of sense. Every game, sport and human competition has champions and favorites because they are about human interactions, which mean that people with unique perspectives tend to be said champions or favorites. If you know of a way that you would rather have a writer act or be, why don't you explain that, maybe some people will agree with you and you would be justified.

Dave doesn't have to be yours, but I think your missing the point.

Just saying you would like to see more than a couple of people over and over again is OK to do. But that begs the question, so why don't you do somthing about it? instead of hiding behind some radical anti-societal outcast theory for gamers.

Since my themes are radical, isn't it fair to say that I'd condone doing things differently than before?

Mr. "I'm channeling anthroposociological certitude",

Don't bully someone who is just calling a duck a duck.
Don't try slippery-sloping my opinion into one that you can formulate response to, thats just stormtrooperlike.

In effort to be kinder than I should, I'll withhold the details of my subjective experiances. Rest easy in the knowledge that your champions can be some of the lowest people you would ever meet outside of the White House. Enjoy your fake sportsmanship with a side of lame hero worship.

Living vicariously through a dork-

That is flipping radical.
Like the truth is.

I have no admiration for the so-called Vs elite.

Yeah yeah, so you won $10,000 playing your, sorry, someone-elses-deck-that-you-got-off-the-net deck in a game of Vs. I think I need to change my pants.

Sorry, celebrity-vs players hold no interest for me. I like the game, nay, love it, but not to the point where I start to worship them like gods and name my unborn children after them.

You want to impress me? Bring peace to the Middle East. Help a blind child to see a rainbow. Invent a commercially viable jetpack. Nobody wants your autograph for winning a TCG. Children in history lessons will not be heard saying "Wow, I wish I could have played Pro Vs like (insert name here)." NO! Kids should go to history and want to be pirates, or ninjas.

I'm a casual player, and I can't stand to be around competitive/tournament types for longer than necessary. Phrases like "Yep. Thats legal.", "Mutual stun." an "Pass" make my blood boil.

"That's legal"!? Of course it's legal. Would I do it if it wasn't? By all means point out my mistakes, but I don't need confirmation that I performed a simple task correctly. What do you want? A cookie?!

"Mutual Stun"? :angry:

"Pass". I hate you. But not as much as I hate myself for not maiming you.

And I reserve a special kind of venom for the guys who look flabbergasted when I "build" my resource (?) before them on thier init. Sorry, did I just make a Vs faux-pas? Go cry to mother.

My rant has ended, but I'll still play my resource when and if I want to.

Lol, I'm not bullying you. I'm just telling you what I think and why. I happen to disagree with you, but just saying "I don't like it" is lame and unfair. I essentially taught Dave the rules of the game with the MOR starter, I know who he is, I know who I am, I don't live vicariously through him nor worship him. He is simply a guy that plays alot of VS, and likes to share his experiences with other people who play and appreciate VS as well, kinda like everyone who posts on vsrealms, except he does it in his particular style.

If you don't like his style, or him or his lack of "hair up there"(my personal beef). Thats awsome, your opinion is cool just like everyone elses. But your suggesting that people getting popular for an opinion or perspective is somhow wrong, doesn't make sense to me. Dave's particular popularity all stems from his personality, his writing, and his playing - thats it. He doesn't stand to inherit UDE or hail from a long line of CCG players, he doesn't even have any real CCG success before VS. So what I'm asking is: why is Dave being popular for his work with VS, bad?

P.S. I think you used esoteric wrong in that sentence, just so you know.

I just hate constructed deck tournament. One 'Teen Titans' influenced deck after another. Oh what a surprise, you're deck (which is strikingly similar to the last three decks I played) defeated my GL deck that's designed to play a game and partially enjoy it to some context.

If I ever meet another person who uses a combination of Silver Surfer, Dr. Light and Roy Harper again I will personally shove their 'pro deck' down their 'pro throat' and then return to reading my latest 'Marvel/DC team-ups that would never happen but still get made into VS decks for the sake of the win'. What ever happened to playing for fun?

Every deck I have is based around some sort of concept, and regardless how loose that concept is there is every chance that the cards I play could be represented as a readable comic! Isn't that the point of VS? To enjoy and particiapate in the battles of the Marvel & DC world?

My rant is over... Now back to the adventures of the mighty team of Silver Surfer, Dr. Light and Roy Harper!

Uhhh... IBL? :)

I personally do see some cliques in the VS Community, but because they are branded as so by Metagame and people of the community. I've definately seen people be so nervous just because they're playing a "Pro". I think its pretty stupid.

Guys like Dave Spears are the popular, because not only does he do well in events, he is an overall nice guy (based on what i've seen of him) and contributes to the online community with articles and such. Stubarnes is popular, not because he is in the top rankings, but because of how much he contributes to the game.

Also, the Metagame coverage does favor players who consistantly do well in events, featuring them repeatedly, rather then showcase other players who are doing well at the events. Therefore I blame Metagame.

teehee, you make me giggle.

For a quick note, I respect good players, not celebs. Main people I respect in this game so far are peter sundholm, mostly because he's local and I always see him kick butt when he does play.

But about your post, the reason people ask legality and all that is because... get this... IT MAY NOT BE LEGAL!

You may want to respond to the attack and make it illegal, you may bounce a character, hide a character, move a character, all sorts of things. That's why people ask if things are illegal.

Yes i'd get ticked if you played your resource outside of your build because that effects the game state. There is a reason why the build step isn't done at the same time. When you are off init you respond to the play of your opponent, so playing your resource down before he is even done playing is just taking a huge dump on the rules of the game, it's not a faux-pas, it's just plain illegal!

Pass, it's the same thing, you keep the chain tidy so that everyone knows whats going on. The likely hood of a mistake drops dramatically if you pass. Plus it makes it harder for your opponent to cheat reactively (Oh, your not gonna reinforce? well then i'm gonna pump my character with 3 savage beatdowns)

Play casual, but play correctly

You make some good points, I am overly bitter today.

But it still bugs me that people not only use the same decks, but exactly the same vocabulary as well.

Your previous post was the most idiotic one in Vsrealms history.

Wow... that actually angers you? I can only hope this was a sad attempt at sarcasm, or somehow involving drugs. Those phrases are not, at their core, anything about trying to make you feel small, but a way to make the game go more smoothly, as well as enforcing 'proper' play. If you play against Doom-based decks enough, or other decks with lockout components, you realize quickly that this isn't just a dickish comment, but rather an indication that your opponent doesn't have anything to stop the attack.

As for mutual stun, that's perhaps the one that can be most questioned, but this is usually just shorthand for, "Alright. If nothing else, your guy and mine both get stunned. Cool?" I usually calculate the stun damage amounts and announce them, so something like, "You're taking 4 and I'm taking 6, then?"

Finally, saying pass is just not playing sloppily. With a lot of pure aggro decks, you usually don't do a lot out of the combat phase except recruit, form, and recover. As I can testify to from playing a few matches of the Teen Titans against New School, some games will have tons of events occur in the draw phase and build phase, where it also becomes infinitely more important that you use the chain properly, or else all hell can break loose in trying to untie a mixing of over a dozen events.

As for playing your resource, while that is an incorrect move, it normally won't matter. However, it occassionally will, and that's where sloppy play will more justifiably anger your opponent than his reaction upsets you. Example: let's say you're facing off against some form of JLoA discard deck. It's their initiative, and you have two cards in your hand. If you play a resource before you're legally allowed to, you're screwing up the game, since he has a point in which he can potentially make you discard both cards, so you'll have no resource to play, barring some other method you have to draw cards. In that case, if you argue about the discard becuase you've slapped down your resource, that's actually, at best, a tragically sloppy play which will be corrected, or at worst, an attempt at cheating.

I'm not judging you as a person, because it's fully possible that your comments are biased by dickish players you face in your area. That should have nothing to do with the specific words they say, however, but in how they're using their words as weapons. If this is the case, I'd hope you might understand that they're the real reason to be upset. If this isn't the case, and you really just hate those phrases, well, everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but I would hope I've revealed that these phrases are not insulting, but merely someone else's attempt to make sure they game they enjoy is played properly. ^_^

Admittedly, it can be a bit frustrating when you play against several decks that are all alike, but there is a pretty sound reason for this.

In any competitive event, everyone there has a reason to play. For most, that goal is to do what they can to win. For that, you're setting yourself up for this if you play the best deck you can. In an environment where people have easy access to a ton of information, it's convenient and logical to work off of the successes of others, since their builds have already proven to work. It's, of course, fully possible for a rogue deck to do well, and the VS system history reflects that new decks are constantly stabbing into the metagame and making their presences known. However, if you're trying to ensure the best chance at winning, it takes far less effort to learn to play a known deck optimally than it takes to form a new deck from scratch, find out if it's viable, optimize it, and learn how to face the other decks in the format.

Then again, in a more 'fun' format, there's a lot to be said for trying out otherwise odd and unsuccessful ideas. I've got a lot of pet decks I've toyed with in the past, and having practice with a fairly solid X-Statix Loner, Manhunter Army, or Sinister Syndicate Rush deck lets me know exactly what types of cards I'm looking to find for those builds when I look to them again in the future. One of my friends absolutely loves villainous teams, and we've had to face his Darkseid's Elite, Revenge Squad, and Arkham Inmates decks for a long time. Does he win often? Not really, but he does win from time to time, and he enjoys that feeling. If you're the type that enjoys trying to squeeze out a win with a crazy, off-beat build, then go for it. At a tournament, realize that your main goal isn't to win at all costs, and you suddenly won't feel nearly as bad if you don't do well in the ratings.

=========================================

Finally, to the thread starter, I think a reason these cliques form is that it's far easier to recognize a few notable people (notable having a broad meaning here) than to try and get every person some real time in the spotlight. How one gains notoriety varies greatly. Spears got his through being vocal, a generally nice person, and proving his talent for VS in several tournaments. That doesn't make him a 'better' person, but he's certainly demonstrated traits that would make him better received than, say, someone who's grumpy and never performs well at VS. Some people, like stubarnes, made a name for themselves without even doing exceptionally well at VS. He's another loud person, but he is, or at least was, lately he's begun to wear down) an extremely idealistic voice for the state of VS system, and while you may not like him, he does have a pretty strong following. Heck, even I, of all people, have a bit of notoriety. Do I play well? My friends might say so, but if you look at my 'professional' record, I could easily be seen as the scrubbiest scrub to ever scrub. If you don't like the idea that some people get more attention than others, that's how life is sometimes. I've only really seen a few individuals get particularly nasty with others because of their status, and of those, it's basically one of two things. In the case of Michael Jacob, he's a scholar of VS, and probably has more games under his belt than 95% of the community. Everyone's entitled to his own opinion, but his are probably more valuable given the amount of testing and experience goes with those statements. Those times he's come across as particularly aggressive, it's been due to his trying to get others to understand how his results do not support someone else's theories. A few other people are just somewhat dickish, and there's always a spot in any media for those people (Bill O'Reilly, perhaps?).

In short, I guess the real lesson is that you can't control what other people do, but you can change how you consider and construe those actions. It's always easy to look at people and the things they do in a negative light, but that's not going to do anything but get you down. Even a minor spark of idealism can go a long way towards making things seem a lot brighter.

I dunno. I've always been jealous of the pro players simply because I'm not one of them. I want a personal fan club. I want to be good at this game. I want to make money playing this game. I want to go to big events more often and have a dedicated team to test with. Jealously turns to hate, and eventually you end up hating the pro players, refusing to talk with them on the prejudgment that they're 'snobs,' and taking a bitter stance on any matter they may be involved in (accusations of cheating, spoiler access, favors from UDE, etc.)

I think you can agree everyone who plays this game is part of a community. Every community has its well-known members. Popularity inevitably seeps into any system you set up, no matter how hard you try to make it seem like everyone is just as good as everyone else. There are gonna be cliques and those more popular than others, and the best thing to do is just learn to deal with it. If players who get more face time than you really and truly take away from the amount of fun you have playing this game, then you should probably stop playing.