http://www.seibertron.com/transformers/news/mtv-geek-reports-rumor-that-disney-is-in-talks-to-acquire-hasbro/26155/

MTV Geek wrote: Well, we have it on good authority that serious discussions are happening at the highest levels of both Disney and Hasbro to fold the largest toy and game company on the planet into the Mouse.

MTV Geek wrote:The acquisition would give Disney the rights to Transformers, G.I. Joe, Dungeons and Dragons, Beyblade, Battleship, Nerf, and Magic: The Gathering among several dozen other game titles and IP. When you add Marvel and Star Wars to that list it’s a pretty comprehensive lock on boy’s entertainment; a far cry from a few years back when Disney was heavily criticized for losing its grip on boys.

Nopenopenope

holy crap.

Disney is going to own the world!

Talk about max profits, owning Starwars and making the toys. Damn.

If this happens, I wonder what will become of D n D and Magic? Keep them? Sell them off eventually.

I hope this means we can get a new animated GI Joe movie.

Screw that, what abour the PONIES!!!!

Why am I not surprised hotsauce...

and they will indeed own the world. Next up for them to buy after Hasbro is GW....

This... worries me. Disney likes to play fast & loose when it comes to unleashing the lawyers with respect to protecting their IP.

Listen, it was going to come from someone eventually, why not me?
But I all honesty, i have a complicated relationship with disney, while i love their parks, there movies are very crud, with too many stereotypes and tropes.
Now I'm parroting my old sociology prof on this, I'm not sure i believe it, but he hated disney for there owning and trvilizing culture. Something like they did the Mardi Gras parade they did after Katrina.

 Piston Honda wrote:
If this happens, I wonder what will become of D n D and Magic? Keep them? Sell them off eventually.

Nothing most likely. Hasbro has been smart enough to let WotC run Magic without interference and just collect a nice profit, and I can't imagine Disney would do anything stupid to change that policy when the game is amazingly successful as it is. Until/unless MTG starts failing to the point that significant changes are necessary the only difference is going to be an additional logo on the package.

 azazel the cat wrote:
This... worries me. Disney likes to play fast & loose when it comes to unleashing the lawyers with respect to protecting their IP.

Yeah, this would be my biggest concern. So far WotC has been pretty generous with MTG/D&D and allowed IP "violations" to keep going as long as nobody does anything stupid and tries to make a business out of it. It's also my biggest concern with Star Wars, will we continue to see fanfilms and similar community projects? Will there still be player-made D&D adventures easily available? Etc.

Dang, Disneys just gotta have their hands in every pot don't they.

At least they seem content to just have their hand in the pot without stirring it.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Piston Honda wrote:
If this happens, I wonder what will become of D n D and Magic? Keep them? Sell them off eventually.

Nothing most likely. Hasbro has been smart enough to let WotC run Magic without interference and just collect a nice profit, and I can't imagine Disney would do anything stupid to change that policy when the game is amazingly successful as it is. Until/unless MTG starts failing to the point that significant changes are necessary the only difference is going to be an additional logo on the package.

 azazel the cat wrote:
This... worries me. Disney likes to play fast & loose when it comes to unleashing the lawyers with respect to protecting their IP.

Yeah, this would be my biggest concern. So far WotC has been pretty generous with MTG/D&D and allowed IP "violations" to keep going as long as nobody does anything stupid and tries to make a business out of it. It's also my biggest concern with Star Wars, will we continue to see fanfilms and similar community projects? Will there still be player-made D&D adventures easily available? Etc.

Considering Playermade are such a big thing for DND, and most RPGS, I would be shocked if they did that.

 azazel the cat wrote:
This... worries me. Disney likes to play fast & loose when it comes to unleashing the lawyers with respect to protecting their IP.

Yep. There's already been a "What about our beloved 3rd party products?!" mini-panic.

Imagine GW IP strategies with D&D...

 d-usa wrote:
Imagine GW IP strategies with D&D...

If Disney DOES get Hasbro and DOES go with the "GW tactic" in regards to 'protecting' the IP of D&D, I think it'd seriously kill the game, and I can see that having an impact on the gaming industry as a whole.

Although, I think that claiming IP on a "wood elf ranger with bow" is a very hard bit of ground to stand on, I guess we'd just have to wait and see.

They own IP on a mouse and round circles with two smaller round circles.

Disney has an IP track record that would make GW jealous, lets hope they keep it our of Hasbro if they get it.

Waiting for MTG cards of Disney characters.

 d-usa wrote:
They own IP on a mouse and round circles with two smaller round circles.

TBH that's a pretty justified trademark. It's a distinctive design (in that context) and well known as the Disney logo and anyone attempting to sell products with it is clearly trying to take advantage of Disney's reputation to fool people into buying it.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Although, I think that claiming IP on a "wood elf ranger with bow" is a very hard bit of ground to stand on, I guess we'd just have to wait and see.

Yeah, but those third-party products depend on being able to use D&D rules, D&D names, "an adventure for D&D 4th edition", etc. You can't claim copyright on a concept as generic as "wood elf ranger with bow" that appears all over fantasy settings, but you can definitely enforce IP rules that would kill third-party development for D&D as we know it.

 Peregrine wrote:

Yeah, but those third-party products depend on being able to use D&D rules, D&D names, "an adventure for D&D 4th edition", etc. You can't claim copyright on a concept as generic as "wood elf ranger with bow" that appears all over fantasy settings, but you can definitely enforce IP rules that would kill third-party development for D&D as we know it.

I'd imagine, in this sense, that these 3rd party developers will either take their stuff elsewhere (to reaper, Pathfinder, etc.) or they develop their own IP to run off of (like reaper, and Pathfinder, etc.)

I wonder if disney would give ffg the middle finger and bring back the starwars miniatures game.

 Piston Honda wrote:
I wonder if disney would give ffg the middle finger and bring back the starwars miniatures game.

Hehe, in a move of pure evil genius, they sign the IP rights to GW to produce the rules and miniatures for the new SW game

I could see GW corporate doing that. They'd make a killing.

This is terrifying, Disney's conquering the earth via entertainment markets.

Indeed,

Those corporate entities that are supposedly controlling the world? Yeah, its Disney. Nobody else really.


They don't even need to have a lobby group to control world events. They are simply brainwashing our children.

Who needs to rule the world when you can let other people do the work while you just lay back and enjoy the show.

Just think about looking at your Transformers, your D&D books, your magic cards...

Hidden Mickeys, hidden Mickeys everywhere...

 d-usa wrote:
Just think about looking at your Transformers, your D&D books, your magic cards...

Hidden Mickeys, hidden Mickeys everywhere...

Dude... I took my kidz to Disney World earlier this year...

Hidden Mickeys are awesome!

There is already a Mickey Mouse Optimus Prime and Donald Duck Transformer.

Fortunately they were one-offs and exclusive to Japan, which at least balanced it with a load of other, much better exclusives.

That mouse is never getting its grasping claws on Megatron and co. If it does, expect self immolation worldwide.

Also, here's a funny idea: Neon Genesis Evangelion as done by Disney.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Indeed,

Those corporate entities that are supposedly controlling the world? Yeah, its Disney. Nobody else really.


They don't even need to have a lobby group to control world events. They are simply brainwashing our children.

Who needs to rule the world when you can let other people do the work while you just lay back and enjoy the show.

Not to mention Disney also owns several huge news organizations too...CNN or MSNBC I think

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Screw that, what abour the PONIES!!!!

They are tasty with hot sauce.

I wonder how this will affect D&D 3E licenses (Pathfinder)? That's my only concern.

Yeah, With the open gaming licenses, can they reverse that?

I thought Disney owned ABC not NBC?

But, doesn't Apple own Disney? or something like that?

Makes this comic from a couple weeks ago all the more funny.

 kronk wrote:
I wonder how this will affect D&D 3E licenses (Pathfinder)? That's my only concern.

I don't think they have any legal grounds to do so. The rights have already been released. My grasp of the law on this isn't perfect by any means, but in the parlance of the playground, I think they declared 'no backsies' on that one.

I hope so, at least. Paizo are a really good company, and they produce really nice content.

The Mouse could buy and sell Apple in it's sleep


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Hahahah, Destikim predicts the future!

There are Brony's in 40k...recently there ben a sighting of one

 htj wrote:

 kronk wrote:
I wonder how this will affect D&D 3E licenses (Pathfinder)? That's my only concern.

I don't think they have any legal grounds to do so. The rights have already been released. My grasp of the law on this isn't perfect by any means, but in the parlance of the playground, I think they declared 'no backsies' on that one.

I hope so, at least. Paizo are a really good company, and they produce really nice content.

Wait, did they buy the D&D 3E rules outright? Or do they have a licensing agreement for X years? Big difference.

 kronk wrote:

 htj wrote:

 kronk wrote:
I wonder how this will affect D&D 3E licenses (Pathfinder)? That's my only concern.

I don't think they have any legal grounds to do so. The rights have already been released. My grasp of the law on this isn't perfect by any means, but in the parlance of the playground, I think they declared 'no backsies' on that one.

I hope so, at least. Paizo are a really good company, and they produce really nice content.

Wait, did they buy the D&D 3E rules outright? Or do they have a licensing agreement for X years? Big difference.

Neither, the rules were released open to the market. No rights were withheld on distribution or production of content using or reprinting those rules so long as the OGL was printed in the text. This kind of thing might be repeal-able, but I'm fairly confident it isn't, especially since it was technically done by a different company entirely (TSR as opposed to WotC).

The new GIJoe movie line is garbage. Dont care what happens to my old favorite collectible anymore.

 AduroT wrote:
Makes this comic from a couple weeks ago all the more funny.

Spoiler:

Hehehe

 Grey Templar wrote:
Indeed,

Those corporate entities that are supposedly controlling the world? Yeah, its Disney. Nobody else really.

I think you'll find that the oil industry still has too much clout for Disney to have sole control. But that's getting, y'know, all serious and stuff.

I wouldn't be so sure.

Next thing you know, and we will be having castle shaped oil rigs.

Bran Dawri wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Indeed,

Those corporate entities that are supposedly controlling the world? Yeah, its Disney. Nobody else really.

I think you'll find that the oil industry still has too much clout for Disney to have sole control. But that's getting, y'know, all serious and stuff.

I think your sarcasim meter is broken


But actually, Disney is at least equivilant to a big oil company.

Big Oil controls a vital resource, but Disney controls people's minds in a much more direct way. Including the people running the big oil

Disney - The Great Devourer

Now we just need a meme with a mickey head super imposed on a hive tyrant body.

 Squigsquasher wrote:


Also, here's a funny idea: Neon Genesis Evangelion as done by Disney.

To give you a taste of what it could be like, there's already a Voltron fig made from Disney characters. Enjoy!

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Squigsquasher wrote:


Also, here's a funny idea: Neon Genesis Evangelion as done by Disney.

To give you a taste of what it could be like, there's already a Voltron fig made from Disney characters. Enjoy!

More like Power Rangers than Voltron, it's produced by Bandai.

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Squigsquasher wrote:


Also, here's a funny idea: Neon Genesis Evangelion as done by Disney.

To give you a taste of what it could be like, there's already a Voltron fig made from Disney characters. Enjoy!

So this is the type of thing you see on bad acid

What is this? Disney, Hasbro, o, i I'think I'm losting my mind. hehehehe. HAHAHAHA

 htj wrote:
Neither, the rules were released open to the market. No rights were withheld on distribution or production of content using or reprinting those rules so long as the OGL was printed in the text. This kind of thing might be repeal-able, but I'm fairly confident it isn't, especially since it was technically done by a different company entirely (TSR as opposed to WotC).

It would be completely bizarre and miles out of left field if it were repealable.

I mean, it's fairly standard in contracts to have clause that voids the license if the licensee changes hands, but never to have the license voided if the licensor changes hands.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
The Mouse could buy and sell Apple in it's sleep


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Hahahah, Destikim predicts the future!

Uh apple is the most (or #2) valuable company in the world. Disney is a mouse next to it.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
The Mouse could buy and sell Apple in it's sleep


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Hahahah, Destikim predicts the future!

Uh apple is the most (or #2) valuable company in the world. Disney is a mouse next to it.

I terms of revenue apple is #18, in terms of market capitalization they're #1.

 Cheesecat wrote:
I terms of revenue apple is #18, in terms of market capitalization they're #1.

Yeah, Disney's market cap is $90 billion, Apple is about $550 billion. So you can fit six mice in an apple.

And Disney grosses about $40 billion a year (though given the nature of the beast about half of that is pure profit), while Apple grosses about $150 billion. So you can almost fit four mice into an apple.

True true, although I think Apple might have hit its stride. They may have trouble in the next decade maintaining their dominance.

 Grey Templar wrote:
True true, although I think Apple might have hit its stride. They may have trouble in the next decade maintaining their dominance.

Absolutely. Their tech gadget dominance is already over, and next to Samsung they're at best equal, and more likely are now in second place. All that wouldn't matter if they'd managed to make istore the market standard before Samsung caught them, but that didn't happen, and now there's rivals.

Their marketing machine is still a thing to behold. I mean, I have an iphone because I have zero sense of direction and when I got a new phone the iphone 3 was the cheapest plan that gave me a phone that could do maps, so I am most certainly not Apple's target market, but even so I was still like holy crap this place looks like the future when my wife's friend dragged us in there so she could look at ipads.

But marketing alone won't make people buy your product. Well, generally it won't. I certainly wouldn't bet $500 billion on it.

 sebster wrote:

 htj wrote:
Neither, the rules were released open to the market. No rights were withheld on distribution or production of content using or reprinting those rules so long as the OGL was printed in the text. This kind of thing might be repeal-able, but I'm fairly confident it isn't, especially since it was technically done by a different company entirely (TSR as opposed to WotC).

It would be completely bizarre and miles out of left field if it were repealable.

I mean, it's fairly standard in contracts to have clause that voids the license if the licensee changes hands, but never to have the license voided if the licensor changes hands.

Good, that's what I thought. Thanks for clearing that up for me.

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Squigsquasher wrote:


Also, here's a funny idea: Neon Genesis Evangelion as done by Disney.

To give you a taste of what it could be like, there's already a Voltron fig made from Disney characters. Enjoy!

What is this I don't even...

At this rate poor Rei and Asuka will hold the world record for youngest and most psychologically disturbed Disney princesses (whilst Misato takes the award for most frequently rat-arsed Disney princess), Shinji will end up singing his undying love for Rei (or Asuka. Or both.) and that AWESOME fight scene in End of Evangelion with Unit 02 and the MP Eva series will become nothing more than the SPECTACULAR ill fitting music, complete with singing and absolutely no brain pans being ruptured at all. Gendo and Yui will live happily ever after, Giant Naked Rei will spawn some convieniently gigantic bra and panties, the Lance of Longuinius will have a smiley face and sing, Ritsuko will only end up stunned, Pen Pen will somehow gain the ability to talk, the Reiquarium will be filled with mermaids, Shinji will be turned from a sympathetic, psychologically disturbed, frightened kid into a stereotypical whiny bitchpants genuinely deserving of hate, Instrumentality will become a cutesy musical number (as opposed to a deeply unsettling musical number that made me question my existence)...

Simply put, NEON GENESIS EVANGELION WILL BE RUINED FOREVER.

I would still support Misato as a Disney princess that would be fecking hilarious.

Actually I would agree with that.

Derek the Prince: I have come to save you! Fear not my lady!

Misato: Feck that. Beer. Now.

Derek the Prince: But M'Lady, do you not want to be rescued from the big white thingy with the teeth, so we can be wed?

Misato: Unless you're a 14 year old boy with confidence issues voiced by Megumi Ogata who I can fawn over and affectionately call "Little Shin" then no. Now about that BEER.

So, are we going to see a D&D-land soon?

 d3m01iti0n wrote:
The new GIJoe movie line is garbage.

I think it says a lot that they decided to delay the release of the second movie by a year in order to make it worse.

Why haven't they realised that you can't add 3D in post production without making it look like gak?

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
The Mouse could buy and sell Apple in it's sleep


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Hahahah, Destikim predicts the future!

Uh apple is the most (or #2) valuable company in the world. Disney is a mouse next to it.

as of right now
Apple: $505Bn market cap
Disney: $90Bn

On the positive DIsney will be around long after Apple goes the way of the Dodo.

That's supposed to be good news?

Saying that, I hate Apple, so...

Disney probably has a greater profit margin, and definitly has job security. plus diversification like nobody else.

 ProtoClone wrote:
So, are we going to see a D&D-land soon?

Is the world ready for a LARP theme park?

Yes, yes it is. Although it would probably allow 18+ only.

LARP? What?

What we need to see is a NGE theme park, complete with life size Angels and Evangelions (come on, a giant Sachiel statue would rock), insane employees, and the ultimate family psychological trauma experience, the Hall of Mind Rape!

Yes, I am obsessed with Neon Genesis Evangelion. Damn you Hideaki Anno, you magnificent, magnificent bastard.

Do any of you really think a 90 billion dollar company is gonna really give 2 squirts about things like D&D and other low dollar value IP's?

I can only see them trying to max them out for profit, failing, then selling the rights years down the road.

Call me a pessimist but I just dont see Disney (or any huge corporation) giving 2 gaks about anything but profits. Look how GW treats their universe and fans. You think Disney is gonna be better?

 DutchKillsRambo wrote:
Do any of you really think a 90 billion dollar company is gonna really give 2 squirts about things like D&D and other low dollar value IP's?

I can only see them trying to max them out for profit, failing, then selling the rights years down the road.

Uhh, making every possible cent out of every possible venture related to everything we own is basically the Disney mission statement. And they're quite good at it.

Call me a pessimist but I just dont see Disney (or any huge corporation) giving 2 gaks about anything but profits. Look how GW treats their universe and fans. You think Disney is gonna be better?

The idea that caring about profits means bad things for the customer is just plain screwy. I mean, did you think Hasbro were stopping to say 'sure this might make money but some noisy nerds on the internet might not like it so we better not do it'?

Then there's the simple, obvious truth that making stuff customers want to buy is what business is. If Disney wants to maximise the value out of Hasbro, that means putting out good products in every line they've got.

If anything it might be GOOD for the IP. It seems to me that D&D has more or less been on the back slide with the same players who've always been playing it still playing it for the most part. Toss a decent D&D movie up on the big screen, follow it with a decent MtG movie and we could see some serious growth in both markets.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
If anything it might be GOOD for the IP. It seems to me that D&D has more or less been on the back slide with the same players who've always been playing it still playing it for the most part. Toss a decent D&D movie up on the big screen, follow it with a decent MtG movie and we could see some serious growth in both markets.

I'm not sure a movie is the answer, to be honest. I think, much like WHFB and 40K, the setting itself is basically a hodge podge of things that already exist in film and tv. The value is in putting those setting elements into a new medium - in miniature for 40K and WHFB, and in an rpg/combat system in D&D.

Put it back into the movies and you end up with just another movie. I mean, ignore the woeful fail that was the first D&D movie, but look at the one they made a while after that. Or look at the 40k movie. At their best moments they were just stuff aping stuff we've seen before.

I mean, it's like the original idea for the Punisher was to take all the 80s action movie tropes and put them into a comic book. Worked well, sold lots of comics. Then some genius thinks they've got a good commercial comic that'd be an easy switch into a movie... and then everyone's shocked that all we've got is just another movie about some guy killing drug dealers.

Same thing for Max Payne - the idea with the first game was to take a John Woo style movie and put it into a computer game. Putting it back onto the big screen and we're left watching a knock off of a John Woo movie.


I think maybe the best thing for D&D is to possibly open out the market. Move it from the nerd stores to the toy stores.

 sebster wrote:
Or look at the 40k movie.

To be fair, that seems to have more to do with the fact that GW decided to do a no-budget direct-to-dvd release with a no-name studio and then never bother marketing it to anyone but existing 40k players. It says a lot about the wisdom of GW's marketing department, but not much about the viability of a proper 40k movie.

Wasn't there a D&D movie a few years back?

I don't think it did well, which is why I probably don't remember it...

So far there have been 2 or 3 D&D movies. All pretty much sank without trace, and deservedly so, as they were dreadful.

Hasbro did actually pave its way for such impending takeover.

http://kukuspace.blogspot.com/2009/06/disney-label-transformer-mickey-mouse.html
And this thing actually exists too!



and it's not the last Disney X Transformers series

http://www.geeknative.com/34271/wizards-of-the-coasts-owners-hasbro-deny-disney-rumours/

After the news of Disney buying Lucasfilm and beginning work on three more Star Wars films there were whispers that Disney was also interested in buying Hasbro.

Buying Hasbro would make some sense for Disney because of the rights the toy company owns. For example, with Marvel on board Disney has a modern day Universe to film, with Lucasfilm they’ve Star Wars for sci-fi stuff and you could argue that perhaps Wizards of the Coast would give them a fantasy setting.

It’s Hasbro’s ownership of titles like Transformers and G.I. Joe that might be more tempting for Disney. Paramount currently hold the movie rights to both of those. You can see the complex web in this Who Owns What? infographic.

Hasbro’s ability to make toys would also be appealing to any company looking to cash in on Star Wars models again.

However, the timing of the rumour feels wrong. Disney spent $4bn on Lucasfilm. Just how much money does Disney have set aside for M&A activity?

According to The Providence Journal Hasbro have now denied the rumours. CNBC analyst David Faber was told by the company;

…absolutely nothing going on that they are aware of at all, in any way, shape or form…

Hasbro wouldn’t have found a buyout all that easy either. The company has partnerships with Disney’s rivals in order to ensure Transformer and G.I. Joe films happen. Without those partnerships the values of the toys is less. If Disney did buy them then, straight away, their value would drop. It would be a recovery mission from day one.

..so.. looks like the lawyers will win whatever then eh ?

They lawyers always win

 Peregrine wrote:

 Piston Honda wrote:
If this happens, I wonder what will become of D n D and Magic? Keep them? Sell them off eventually.

Nothing most likely. Hasbro has been smart enough to let WotC run Magic without interference and just collect a nice profit, and I can't imagine Disney would do anything stupid to change that policy when the game is amazingly successful as it is. Until/unless MTG starts failing to the point that significant changes are necessary the only difference is going to be an additional logo on the package.

Now, see, I hate the direction Magic has gone in (personal preference and all), and I'd be happy if Disney brought it back to its roots-4th edition, Sea Monster coming in as a 5/5 costing 6 mana, a strong creature, but no wacky abilities. Now you have things like "super awesome colossus"-costs 1 generic, but you must sacrifice 15 power worth of creatures when he comes into play, he's indestructible, has trample, and is a 15/15 himself. Who wants to play with crap like that? Sadly, lots of people, or Magic would be in the tubes. Stupid people let games become bad...Richard Garfield must hate his brainchild...

Aaaaand: Looks to be a false alarm, people!

http://www.seibertron.com/transformers/news/hasbro-denies-rumor-that-they-are-in-negotiations-with-disney/26165/

Providence Journal wrote:
Hasbro declined comment, citing its policy of not talking about rumor or speculation. CNBC analyst David Faber reported that Hasbro's advisors told him there's "absolutely nothing going on that they are aware of at all, in any way, shape or form" involving Hasbro or Disney.

Wall Street analysts said a Disney acquisition didn't make much sense, just after Disney agreed to buy Lucasfilm Ltd. for $4.05 billion. And for any deal to happen, Hasbro would have to dissolve agreements with Disney's competitors.

 timetowaste85 wrote:
Sea Monster coming in as a 5/5 costing 6 mana, a strong creature, but no wacky abilities.

Which nobody ever played because it was garbage.

Now you have things like "super awesome colossus"-costs 1 generic, but you must sacrifice 15 power worth of creatures when he comes into play, he's indestructible, has trample, and is a 15/15 himself. Who wants to play with crap like that?

Nobody wants to play with it, but that's ok because it doesn't exist.

 Peregrine wrote:

Now you have things like "super awesome colossus"-costs 1 generic, but you must sacrifice 15 power worth of creatures when he comes into play, he's indestructible, has trample, and is a 15/15 himself. Who wants to play with crap like that?

Nobody wants to play with it, but that's ok because it doesn't exist.

Sure it exists... it's my picture!

 Peregrine wrote:

 timetowaste85 wrote:
Sea Monster coming in as a 5/5 costing 6 mana, a strong creature, but no wacky abilities.

Which nobody ever played because it was garbage.

Now you have things like "super awesome colossus"-costs 1 generic, but you must sacrifice 15 power worth of creatures when he comes into play, he's indestructible, has trample, and is a 15/15 himself. Who wants to play with crap like that?

Nobody wants to play with it, but that's ok because it doesn't exist.

In my area, plenty of people had sea monsters when it came out-we also weren't power gamers. And I might be mixing up a couple cards, so sue me. But there is a 1 cost creature with a huge p/t that forces you to sac creatures to pay for him. And indestructible was the worst game mechanic ever created. Mirrodin destroyed Magic for me (darksteel can suck my ), as well as the Kamigawa block. Legends were supposed to be, you know...LEGENDARY, not every other card. Two stupid cycles, and I was done. I tried coming back, and they brought back Mirrodin. Stupid game.

 timetowaste85 wrote:
And I might be mixing up a couple cards, so sue me. But there is a 1 cost creature with a huge p/t that forces you to sac creatures to pay for him.

Phyrexian Dreadnought, from 16 years ago.

Personally, the biggest thing that bugs me about modern Magic is the Mythic Rare paywall. Making it so difficult to actually obtain the cards killed my interest in the game.

 timetowaste85 wrote:
In my area, plenty of people had sea monsters when it came out-we also weren't power gamers.

Exactly. You weren't power gamers, so the problem isn't MTG's design decisions, it's that you aren't very good at evaluating power level. Sea Monsters were garbage compared to other creatures that existed at the time they were printed, so it's not exactly surprising that you can find creatures in newer sets that are also better.

But there is a 1 cost creature with a huge p/t that forces you to sac creatures to pay for him.

It's also a terrible card. It's an amusing idea (have the cost of the card be the bloody sacrifices to summon it instead of the mana), but outside of the most casual games it was just another Sea Monster: a garbage card that never leaves the commons box.

And indestructible was the worst game mechanic ever created.

Hardly. There were plenty of counters to it (remove from game, return to hand, counterspells, etc), and thanks to WOTC being conservative in their use of the mechanic most of the cards with it weren't powerful enough to use. It's an interesting mechanic with the potential to make you think about your strategy, but not even close to game breaking.

And this is especially amusing considering the same block contained a REAL candidate for "worst game mechanic ever created" in Affinity. You know, the one that dominated the tournament environment and resulted in multiple cards being banned because it built brutally powerful and fast decks that were not even remotely fun to play against. Indestructible isn't even close to that level.

Legends were supposed to be, you know...LEGENDARY, not every other card.

Yeah, they weren't supposed to be every other card, which is why the very first set where they were first introduced (Legends, remember it?) made them pretty much every other card, including a giant pile of "legends" which were just generic (and garbage) creatures with no special abilities. I really have to wonder if you even played the same MTG as the rest of us.


(PS: the theme of the block was based around legendary characters, so it's not really a surprise that there would be more of them than usual.)

 Peregrine wrote:

But there is a 1 cost creature with a huge p/t that forces you to sac creatures to pay for him.

It's also a terrible card. It's an amusing idea (have the cost of the card be the bloody sacrifices to summon it instead of the mana), but outside of the most casual games it was just another Sea Monster: a garbage card that never leaves the commons box.

meh, I kind of remember it being at least somewhat good in the non-tier1 raffinity variant decks for a short while. yes, us casual players had fun with it

Bolognesus wrote:
meh, I kind of remember it being at least somewhat good in the non-tier1 raffinity variant decks for a short while. yes, us casual players had fun with it

Sure, but "somewhat good" and "us casual players had fun with it" doesn't make it bad game design.

gak. That means that Disney will have all the Dungeons and Dragons Princesses to ad to the Disney Princesses. I sure hope it doesn't happen.

If Arcee ends up as a Disney Princess I will be very very angry.

http://www.sfx.co.uk/2012/11/10/michael-arndt-confirmed-as-star-wars-episode-vii-scripter/

Finally, some definite news about Star Wars Episode VII, rather than all those “Mike Leigh/Nick Park/Lars Von Trier/Dan Harmon/Ronald McDonald Says He’s Not Interested In Directing Star Wars” stories that have been clogging up news feeds over the past few days.

Star Wars.com has now confirmed that – as rumours suggested yesterday – Michael Arndt will be scripting Star Wars Episode VII from an extensive treatment that he has already handed in.

A lot of fuss has already been made of Arndt’s Disney connection – he wrote Toy Story 3 – with certain internet pundits seemingly seeing this as proof that the Mouse House intends to kidify the series. That’s a very blinkered view on Arndt’s credentials, though.

He also won an Oscar for the brilliant Little Miss Sunshine, and has also scripted the upcoming Oblivion and The Hunger Games: Catching Fire. He is also an out and proud Star Wars fan. And let’s be honest – Toy Story 3 was bloody brilliant and made grown men cry. He sounds like a pretty intelligent choice to us.

And while we await the next piece of solid news about Star Wars Episode VII, here’s a second video of George Lucas in conversation with the new overseer of the franchise, Kathleen Kennedy, talking about the future of the film series.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=EBuOHM51YdI

Sounds like good news... Toy Story 3 was awesome, and I loved Little Miss Sunshine...

I'll be interested to see what Disney do with Star Wars TBH... Maybe I won't like it, but meh, I'm cautiously optimistic about it...

Is that not supposed to be in the other 'Disney buying things' thread?

Not my little pony!

Well, MLP couldn't possibly get any worse, even if it was owned by Disney...

Hmmm, I wonder what would happen if George Lucas bought Hasbro?

It would get infinitely better?

I know everybody hates him, but he was still the one who brought us the original Star Wars films. And Revenge of the Sith was pretty darn good.

Better put on that tinfoil hat complimenting ROTS.

What? I thought it wasn't too bad. I can understand why people didn't like The Phantom Menace (although I liked it) but Revenge of the Sith was a decent film. I didn't see any glaring problems with it.

A lot of fuss has already been made of Arndt’s Disney connection – he wrote Toy Story 3 – with certain internet pundits seemingly seeing this as proof that the Mouse House intends to kidify the series. That’s a very blinkered view on Arndt’s credentials, though.

Um, lulz? They say that like it isn't already kiddy.

 LordofHats wrote:

A lot of fuss has already been made of Arndt’s Disney connection – he wrote Toy Story 3 – with certain internet pundits seemingly seeing this as proof that the Mouse House intends to kidify the series. That’s a very blinkered view on Arndt’s credentials, though.

Um, lulz? They say that like it isn't already kiddy.

Right. Even then, Toy Story, like The Last Airbender, is the good sort of kiddy: the sort that appeals to both kids and adults. The sort that Star Wars movies were supposed to be. Better that than alienating the kids with trade disputes and an obnoxious love story and alienating adults with kid Anakin and an obnoxious love story.

Still, at least the obnoxious love story remembers that dating the creepy, aggressive guy who expects you to keep your relationship a secret is going to end in tears domestic violence, unlike a certain bestseller I could mention.

What would that bestseller be?

Fifty Shades of Grey: the romantic equivalent of telling newbies that claymores are full of delicious candy.

Ah. I see. Knowing little about FSOG, I can't comment.

For a second I thought you meant Twilight

 Grey Templar wrote:
For a second I thought you meant Twilight

I pretty much did: Fifty Shades of Grey started life as a piece of Twilight alternate universe fanfiction called Master of the Universe.

uggg, Twilight fanfiction. Now thats a scary proposition.

Wow, guy responsible for TS3 is doing the next Star Wars films? Um....wow. I'm speechless. In a good way. TS3 was amazing. It was sad and powerful. Justice will be done to the SW francise with him at the helm.

 Peregrine wrote:
To be fair, that seems to have more to do with the fact that GW decided to do a no-budget direct-to-dvd release with a no-name studio and then never bother marketing it to anyone but existing 40k players. It says a lot about the wisdom of GW's marketing department, but not much about the viability of a proper 40k movie.

Meh, the production values sucked, but even they'd been amazing all we would have ended up with was a pretty, but generic sci-fi action movie.

When your basic creative concept is to take ideas from film and other media and mould them into miniatures, then you may well end up with a really cool line of miniatures and a fun game. But if you then take all that and turn it into a movie of its own, then you're almost destined to end up with a really dull movie.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 d-usa wrote:
Wasn't there a D&D movie a few years back?

I don't think it did well, which is why I probably don't remember it...

There have been at least two D&D movies. I mentioned them in my post, exactly two posts above the one where you asked this question;
"I mean, ignore the woeful fail that was the first D&D movie, but look at the one they made a while after that."

Does nobody read threads? Why are people here if they're not reading other posts?

 Grey Templar wrote:
Hmmm, I wonder what would happen if George Lucas bought Hasbro?

I don't wanna see a Jar Jar pony

Might make MLP worth watching...

My Little Jar-jar. Has a nice ring to it.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Might make MLP worth watching...

My Little Jar-jar. Has a nice ring to it.

OKay... that was funny... wasn't expecting.

Now I have this image of Jar Jar, rainbows and ponies...

Thanks a lot man

 AlexHolker wrote:
I pretty much did: Fifty Shades of Grey started life as a piece of Twilight alternate universe fanfiction called Master of the Universe.

With that title it really should have been He-Man fan fiction.