Pokemon tcg players will never understand the struggle after transitioning from Pokemon to MTG and going from 'draw 6 cards' to 'if X happens during Y and you have A and B you may draw 1 card'
You left out the rest of the card, "...reveal that card, then you lose 1 life and discard a card, or sacrifice a creature. If it's nighttime roll a D20 and hide a number of items equal to the number rolled in a 10 foot by 10 foot area no further than 10 feet from the game and turn off the lights. If an opponent finds all the items you hid this way, you lose the game. If all items are not found, choose a player other than yourself and flip a coin. The player you choose this way calls heads or tails. The winner of the coin toss draws a card, then discards a card from their hand. If you hid an orange that wasn't found exile this card and return it to the battlefield as a 1/1 cat detective hero token with islandwalk."
This is what I like to see! I think there’s always been a stigma around Pokemon for people who have never played it. They need to try it, not only is it fun, competitive, and cheap, but the cards they’re making now are just insanely beautiful.
Couldn't agree more. Especially in the competitive MtG scene there's a lot of elitist behaviour regarding other TCGs. "If you can't make it in MtG, have you tried Pokemon?" tbh coming from MtG, Pokemon feels a lot more involved because of what Jared called "front-loaded". Outside of starting hands, variance is a lot smaller, so luck plays less of a factor compared to MtG. Which in turn means skill and practice is even more important.
My son thinks I'm crazy because I won't play cards unless they break the rules or find ways to break the rules. Pokémon has a huge problem with how fast the decks are. They put themselves in a situation where rare candy is too good, but you can't really do anything about it or single prize decks will just run over the meta.
I’ve played magic and yugioh. Tried pokemon I wasn’t really a fan. I don’t like how combo based the game is. Too much searching and too many items. I wasn’t too big of a fan of digimon but it’s definitely better than Pokemon. Gonna give Lorcana and One Piece a try.
I think the massive issue stopping a lot of people around me from playing Pokemon is what seems to be the smallest player base. At our locals we have around 20-30 constantly for yugioh and around 20 for magic I have never seen a Pokemon event happen in the 10 years I’ve gone and they actively promote Pokemon
The player base is rapidly growing, but local shops and everything need to catch up for sure. In my area a lot of places are starting to do Pokémon that never have before
@@rCrypto_Frog4148 If we exclude collectors, I'm pretty sure Yu-Gi-Oh is still number 2. The Pokémon TCG is propped up by the IP as a whole. The people that are into Yu-Gi-Oh are there almost exclusively for the card game. I don't think the same can be said for the Pokémon TCG.
Bruh. You can’t beat putting $5,000 worth of fancy cardboard onto the table and battling it out against other owners of piles of fancy cardboard also worth thousands of dollars. Anything else is cringe.
There is interaction in Pokemon. It's called disruption. All of which eventually became far too broken and had to be banned. Hand destruction down to zero. Energy removal down to no energy in play. In the team plasma era had power spray and mespirit which stopped poke powers. Even harder locks built around vileplumes ability that stops all item cards. Its really only this last 4 years that disruption is limited. Leading to high damage being the only way to win at the moment.
@JO-iv7tl of course there are interactions in Pokemon: boss order, any attacks, Iono... Obviously you are not playing alone, so you interact right? The huge difference with MTG is: "you cannot interact with your opponent DURING ITS TURN". And it's a huge difference. In Pokémon, your turn is a safe place & you can optimize it with no external influence. Jared's comparison with chess is very true actually. Like in chess, when it's your turn, no one but you will change the board state.
@@Tamiyo-z6o there can be no direct comparison. Any effect that used against the opponent is build into a card. Such as an ability on a pokemon or effect of a stadium card. Making any use of disruption a commitment. In actual cards and card counts. Also direct counters are very rare; being these often get used in creative ways that are far more destructive than originally intended. From my observation less of the deck space is needed to disrupt and you have access to a side board. In blunt it's a blanket of oppression in pokemon as opposed to instances of negation at will in magic. That being said pokemon diverged from magic on purpose. For both better and worse.
Funnily enuf my old Pokémon collection from when I was a kid is in the eras u describe. Unless things have changed since I last looked or I missed it, most of my cards r too old to play in the 2 legal formats I vaguely know of. So IF I wanted to play Pokémon I cudnt in a tournament. Dark, gym leaders, lv.X, team rocket, team plasma, and maybe even others, along w the “newer” 1s like EX and mega. Ive got “supporters” from back when they didn’t have the unique once per turn ruling. I’m not even old, yet I’ve got Pokémon EXs older then some kids playing Pokémon these days lol. I’ve got almost if not every printing of switch until around 2016. Like 95% of my Pokémon cards must be from hoenn, sinnoh, and unova.
The coolest part about Pokémon compared to other card games is the amount of meta gaming, how much impact a tech card can have, how you tech your deck for the meta. So much is splash able because there’s no color requirements
Very interesting video! I'm playing both aswell and all you said is obviously very true. I would add 2 things: 1) In Magic, most of the time you play with a third of your deck while in Pokémon you play every game with [54; 60] cards. 2) in Pokémon 20-50% of your active cards will be the same than your opponent (prof researches, Iono, Ultra ball, etc.), which is by far less the case in MTG as your cards are colours-related. These 2 reasons tend to explain why there is no 15-cards side board in Pokémon IMO 1) it would be very easy to find them in your deck (as opposed to MTG where sometime you see none of your sideboard cards during the game), which may completly break the match up (even more if your opponent is doing the same...). 2) as many of your cards are the same no matter the deck you play, you could very easily transform your deck by adding 15 new cards in it (ex: game 1 you play Rapid strike Inteleon, game 2 sideboard to turn your deck into chien pao is almost faisible).
Love the video, well put together, wanted to say that first and formost The problem with PTCG is Prizes, the player winning gets to have a huge resource advantage which feeds into itself, not to mention prizing tech cards against certain matchups, like Prizing Aegislash V vs Forest Camo Decidueye. imo prizes should be chosen, draw 13 cards, pick 6 to be prizes, or some variant of that. Prizing is just overall a bad mechanic and needs an overhaul
Both of you are correct. There is no easy solution to "life decking" in any TCG, other than making the opponent take prizes and first to zero LOSES, where then it becomes a catch-up mechanic not congruent with the flavor of "taking prizes during your Pokemon battle"
Your insight into the pokemon tcg was really interesting. I just think a big problem with pokemon is that they only support the standard format and the format is continuously power crept by creatures with bigger numbers. They dont really add interesting machanics that create new strategies and only recycle old machanics. The game has gotten stale for me.
My son and I just started playing Pokémon and while it's fun, it gets stale pretty fast. I think this is because their is so little interaction. The inclusion of a couple of supporters has made player engagement a lot better, but I hope they find some way to keep pushing that trend. "Going off" with a Chien-Poa on turn 2 after having gone through half my deck without human inter action is only fun for so long.
As a Yu-Gi-Oh player myself I watched pokemon tcg worlds for the whole weekend and I enjoyed it so much that I'm starting learning Pokemon tcg. Where can you get that "Winner's deck" for 30$ is it usable to play in tournaments ? I have been playing Yu-Gi-Oh for 14 years now and I have been having so much fun learning Pokemon, both games are fun and it is on our side to keep enjoying all of them!
One thing about pokemon vs magic, i find it wayyyyyyy easier to teach pokemon than magic. I can get someone playing pokemon with basic proficiency in like... 15 minutes. Magic is so much more non-linear and interactive, so its less intuitive what to do at any time. Also most people already have a base familiarity with what pokemon is about. Both are fun, but pokemon is more fun for noobs.
Only thing that puts me off from Pokemon is the mons I like tend to not have a viable deck (like Scolipede being just starter deck filler), or it has one but from a very long time ago so it falls outside the locals formats they play. Hopefully I'll get a real cool Scolipede deck in the future, lol
There are various lands that have a similar effect: Cavern of Souls, City of Brass, Gemstone Mine, ... But all come with a drawback (i.e., a restriction on how you can spend the mana or opportunity costs).
I’ve had some success in competitive mtg locally and after messing with Pokémon for a month or two it feels like the main difference between the two is that in mtg it feels like you can always make a play that gives you a chance to win a game but in Pokémon the outcome seems to come from who’s deck starts taking prize cards first
I used to play Pokémon but the amount of times my opponent blew me out on turn 1 was way to high. Maybe the meta is an better spot now but I just can’t get behind a game where you potentially have no chance to play.
My main gripe about Pokemon compared to magic is In Pokemon it seems that most decks focus around powering up one big EX Pokemon and spamming one attack over and over until you win. The first person to draw enough energy to use that attack wins 90% of the time. In magic even if you threw down a 30/30 creature someone could cast a counter-spell or a murder card and that big bad is swiped into the graveyard instantly unless they counter your counter. Magic is awesome because you never really know what your opponent will do. Wether a 100 rats or barely any creatures and just spells it gets wild
Pokemon end phase: I’ll attack and end turn with a full bench of guys 🥰 Magic end phase: Nothing I did this turn will matter my entire board is disappearing by my next turn
Tbh, for me, in pokemon it relies a lot more on the player to win than the cards you're holding. Not that luck doesn't come into play once in awhile but I find that a lot of the times when I lose, it's my fault. For mtg, top decks are usually worth thousands of dollars and how games are played feel like your deck does a lot of the carrying for you instead of putting in deep thought. Then in game 2, you have to have a good grasp on your opponent's deck and switch out cards from your main to sideboard and hope everything works out. Still, I can't hold one game to be better than the other... Magic's artwork is probably the best in entire tcg gaming. The text is a bit longer in Magic but nothing like Yu-Gi-Oh. Its a bit biased but I can't do magic dirty.
I play pokemon before play commander. and I found this 100% accurate. like when first time I play commander, I struggle to set up my board. cuz everything need mana. for draw, for play, for counter. so slow, no welder, no accelerated energy, need pricey thing to catch up pokemon speed. but one think I like in magic, their ETB effect no need come from hand. Imagine dedenne GX doesnt have to play from hand to discard card and draw 6
Even moreso now 💀 current meta decks in Pokemon have been in the rotation for a good bit, but that's a good thing when the design-space and banlist make them balanced against each other. Magic's Standard design and ESPECIALLY MH3 have proven your comment even more hilariously correct in retrospect.
Pokemon is STRONG and combo/lock heavy, but so are MTG and YGO. However, both have ridiculous, top-heavy expensive Metas mainly built around the "new new"
Wizards designed the Pokémon game and cards. They’re kinda the same game “backwards” - you know what I mean, the way you attach energies / lands work. I like the simplified. I play pokemon
I used to believe this, but I recently found out on a RUclips Pokémon card history binge that Creatures Inc. designed the Pokémon TCG and cards. Heavily inspired by magic of course, but wizards of the coast did not design the game. Wotc was responsible for publishing the cards in America
I played pokemon for a while and honestly i got bored of it pretty quickly. I found the game a little too consistent and simple. Ive been having a lot more fun playing commander.
I tried it like 5 years back. Felt more like solitaire. Same with yugioh nowadays too, which is why I quit/ I'm playing MTG now. Not of fan of turn one solitaire, I win cuz I went first. Pretty dumb
Its pretty turn one dependent now but the format is becoming a lot more skill driven imo (or maybe i was really bad back then) MTG is pretty solitaire also. Once you get over the wall of text cards, every matchup is pretty similar.
Having looked into all of the big 3 pretty extensively now, by far Pokémon is the weakest mechanically speaking. The prize card system causing potential snowballing while also not always being very meaningful, lack of meaningful counterplay, and problem that the typing system being linked with the very energy used to attack all are huge redflags (surprisingly no one even talks about this last one even though it's basically the same as the dredge problem in Mtg in a roundabout way). All 3 suffer greatly from luck, so that area is kind of a wash. Mtg suffers from resource issues causing inequality, and yugioh suffers from overcomplexity that leads to OTKs too easily. Pokémon just wasn't fine tuned enough to start, so any changes that they've made to it haven't really solved its problems, and in some ways have just made them worse. Manage to buildup an army in the back and save up to attack your opponent's big Pokémon? Well you just won that encounter and got bonuses for taking out their big threat, honestly they probably ought to just forfeit now because you are so far ahead. It makes a single victory possibly the only meaningful battle in the whole match.
1) prize system has its flaws but it is not a great issue and it does introduce some good variety to games. duel masters made it right. 2) the game is so designed. it is a take it or leave it thing. still some counterplay exists. having no sideboard means all decks are somewhat toolbox decks. 3) can you clarify your point please?
@@goncaloferreira6429 definitely agree that duel masters' version is way better. Not sure what you're saying by "the game is so designed". Which point(s) would you like me to clarify?
@@okeytay4 well, some of the problems you see are the definition of the game and the vision the company has for the game. clarification: the part when you compare pkm energy with mtg´s dredge? something no one talks about?
@@goncaloferreira6429 So the dredge mechanic in mtg is infamous because the general mechanics of the game makes it a looping system of nearly automatic winners that is by it's very nature anti-competitive. Let me explain. Basically the dredge mechanic works in such a way that exploits the discard pile and general cost of playing cards in such a way that if a deck doesn't have counters to it, it basically gives the dredge player such an advantage that it is like an automatic win. Conversely, if you do have significant counters to dredge, it is such an advantage that you will win nearly every time. Because of the large investment of cards it takes to either use dredge effectively or counter it effectively, a deck playing against a deck prepared for dredge will also likely win nearly automatically because deck 1 is prepared for dredge and is starting with such niche cards. It stops being a game of mostly strategy where either side has a chance on any turn to win or get ahead, and becomes one of rock, paper, scissors where both players choose the same option every turn with the options being chosen before the players ever meet. The type chart is exactly that, a slightly more complex version of rock, paper, scissors. The Pokémon video game has been criticized for this for years, but because of dual typing, held items, and abilities, it mitigates this to some degree. The tcg not only doesn't have any of this, it has a shallower move pool per Pokémon and makes you invest resources into a match up that could already be disadvantageous to begin with and lose those resources when the Pokémon goes away (or am I misremembering on that last point). Now the type match ups are actually more forgiving in the tcg than the video game, but they do still exist, and with only slightly more than half the single types than the tcg, this is yet another not great factor. Dredge and pokemons' type system are anti-competitive because they automatically control the shape of the meta as long as they remain unchecked by the rules.
@@okeytay4 hum, i think we are talking about match ups and balance. the dredge topic: dredge is broken as they pushed it too hard and it requires very specific answers. But mtg is a best of 3/5 game with sideboards and that means that overall dredge is "easy to counter" if the other players are expecting to face that deck. Furthermore most tcgs often have this type of all-in strategies that can feel impossible to beat but are actually very beatable. it seems yout opinions on pokemon are based more on the videogames? on the tcg i have always thought that the type system is a clever base rules safety vault that, optimaly, makes it impossible for any deck/type to dominate to much since the existance of the opposite type will always offer a counter to it.
Why wouldn't you want to play Pokémon with your kids. I can't think of a single reason as to why you wouldn't play even to just teach them and spend time together.
![Kodak Black - Catch Fire [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/A4ch-olIuZo/mqdefault.jpg)
Pokemon tcg players will never understand the struggle after transitioning from Pokemon to MTG and going from 'draw 6 cards' to 'if X happens during Y and you have A and B you may draw 1 card'
Dragon Rage Channeler would be the worst Pokémon card (it is a Pokémon card and it sucks)
You left out the rest of the card, "...reveal that card, then you lose 1 life and discard a card, or sacrifice a creature. If it's nighttime roll a D20 and hide a number of items equal to the number rolled in a 10 foot by 10 foot area no further than 10 feet from the game and turn off the lights. If an opponent finds all the items you hid this way, you lose the game. If all items are not found, choose a player other than yourself and flip a coin. The player you choose this way calls heads or tails. The winner of the coin toss draws a card, then discards a card from their hand. If you hid an orange that wasn't found exile this card and return it to the battlefield as a 1/1 cat detective hero token with islandwalk."
Ya I'm tryna have fun, not solve logic puzzles. Magic is an amazing intricate game though, I just prefer the simplicity of Pokemon.
This is what I like to see! I think there’s always been a stigma around Pokemon for people who have never played it. They need to try it, not only is it fun, competitive, and cheap, but the cards they’re making now are just insanely beautiful.
Couldn't agree more. Especially in the competitive MtG scene there's a lot of elitist behaviour regarding other TCGs. "If you can't make it in MtG, have you tried Pokemon?" tbh coming from MtG, Pokemon feels a lot more involved because of what Jared called "front-loaded". Outside of starting hands, variance is a lot smaller, so luck plays less of a factor compared to MtG. Which in turn means skill and practice is even more important.
@@nilsmuller9286Nah, it’s more of a financial snobbery thing. Can’t afford $8,000 for a competitive deck? Go play Pokémon, loser!
The barrier to entry is so insanely low. This has to be Pokémon biggest strength, putting all the secondary market value in alternative arts.
The full arts are amazing. I just wish they limited them to the actual Pokemon, and not the human characters.
I used to play Magic, now I play Pokémon, when I first started, cards like Professor's Research blew my mind.
My son thinks I'm crazy because I won't play cards unless they break the rules or find ways to break the rules. Pokémon has a huge problem with how fast the decks are. They put themselves in a situation where rare candy is too good, but you can't really do anything about it or single prize decks will just run over the meta.
@@chrislovelace1678 what do you mean? Have you played yugioh??
Yugioh is way more fast.
I’ve played magic and yugioh. Tried pokemon I wasn’t really a fan. I don’t like how combo based the game is. Too much searching and too many items.
I wasn’t too big of a fan of digimon but it’s definitely better than Pokemon. Gonna give Lorcana and One Piece a try.
I think the massive issue stopping a lot of people around me from playing Pokemon is what seems to be the smallest player base. At our locals we have around 20-30 constantly for yugioh and around 20 for magic I have never seen a Pokemon event happen in the 10 years I’ve gone and they actively promote Pokemon
The player base is rapidly growing, but local shops and everything need to catch up for sure. In my area a lot of places are starting to do Pokémon that never have before
Sad. Pokémon is for kids. They don’t even have frost giants, dryads or gnomes ffs!
i think pokemon is now the #2 TCG and knocked yugs to #3
@@rCrypto_Frog4148 If we exclude collectors, I'm pretty sure Yu-Gi-Oh is still number 2. The Pokémon TCG is propped up by the IP as a whole. The people that are into Yu-Gi-Oh are there almost exclusively for the card game. I don't think the same can be said for the Pokémon TCG.
Dude at my LGS I think the change Friday Night Magic to Pokemon
This video pushed me to the edge to really try to get good at pokemon. Thank you
Definitely follow to see my journey as well! I also have this goal haha
JW’s tweet was surreal and watching it’s reaction as time goes on is a real bruh moment. Because it’s hilarious that no MtG or YGO believes it. STILL.
Bruh. You can’t beat putting $5,000 worth of fancy cardboard onto the table and battling it out against other owners of piles of fancy cardboard also worth thousands of dollars. Anything else is cringe.
There is interaction in Pokemon. It's called disruption. All of which eventually became far too broken and had to be banned.
Hand destruction down to zero. Energy removal down to no energy in play. In the team plasma era had power spray and mespirit which stopped poke powers. Even harder locks built around vileplumes ability that stops all item cards.
Its really only this last 4 years that disruption is limited. Leading to high damage being the only way to win at the moment.
True! Hex Maniac was also board interaction in a way
@JO-iv7tl of course there are interactions in Pokemon: boss order, any attacks, Iono... Obviously you are not playing alone, so you interact right? The huge difference with MTG is: "you cannot interact with your opponent DURING ITS TURN". And it's a huge difference. In Pokémon, your turn is a safe place & you can optimize it with no external influence.
Jared's comparison with chess is very true actually. Like in chess, when it's your turn, no one but you will change the board state.
@@Tamiyo-z6o not anymore can during an opponents turn be interacted with.
@@Tamiyo-z6o there can be no direct comparison. Any effect that used against the opponent is build into a card. Such as an ability on a pokemon or effect of a stadium card. Making any use of disruption a commitment. In actual cards and card counts. Also direct counters are very rare; being these often get used in creative ways that are far more destructive than originally intended.
From my observation less of the deck space is needed to disrupt and you have access to a side board.
In blunt it's a blanket of oppression in pokemon as opposed to instances of negation at will in magic.
That being said pokemon diverged from magic on purpose. For both better and worse.
Funnily enuf my old Pokémon collection from when I was a kid is in the eras u describe. Unless things have changed since I last looked or I missed it, most of my cards r too old to play in the 2 legal formats I vaguely know of. So IF I wanted to play Pokémon I cudnt in a tournament. Dark, gym leaders, lv.X, team rocket, team plasma, and maybe even others, along w the “newer” 1s like EX and mega. Ive got “supporters” from back when they didn’t have the unique once per turn ruling. I’m not even old, yet I’ve got Pokémon EXs older then some kids playing Pokémon these days lol. I’ve got almost if not every printing of switch until around 2016. Like 95% of my Pokémon cards must be from hoenn, sinnoh, and unova.
The coolest part about Pokémon compared to other card games is the amount of meta gaming, how much impact a tech card can have, how you tech your deck for the meta. So much is splash able because there’s no color requirements
Very interesting video!
I'm playing both aswell and all you said is obviously very true. I would add 2 things:
1) In Magic, most of the time you play with a third of your deck while in Pokémon you play every game with [54; 60] cards.
2) in Pokémon 20-50% of your active cards will be the same than your opponent (prof researches, Iono, Ultra ball, etc.), which is by far less the case in MTG as your cards are colours-related.
These 2 reasons tend to explain why there is no 15-cards side board in Pokémon IMO
1) it would be very easy to find them in your deck (as opposed to MTG where sometime you see none of your sideboard cards during the game), which may completly break the match up (even more if your opponent is doing the same...).
2) as many of your cards are the same no matter the deck you play, you could very easily transform your deck by adding 15 new cards in it (ex: game 1 you play Rapid strike Inteleon, game 2 sideboard to turn your deck into chien pao is almost faisible).
Love the video, well put together, wanted to say that first and formost
The problem with PTCG is Prizes, the player winning gets to have a huge resource advantage which feeds into itself, not to mention prizing tech cards against certain matchups, like Prizing Aegislash V vs Forest Camo Decidueye. imo prizes should be chosen, draw 13 cards, pick 6 to be prizes, or some variant of that. Prizing is just overall a bad mechanic and needs an overhaul
Prizing is what makes pokémon pokémon lol
Both of you are correct. There is no easy solution to "life decking" in any TCG, other than making the opponent take prizes and first to zero LOSES, where then it becomes a catch-up mechanic not congruent with the flavor of "taking prizes during your Pokemon battle"
Your insight into the pokemon tcg was really interesting. I just think a big problem with pokemon is that they only support the standard format and the format is continuously power crept by creatures with bigger numbers. They dont really add interesting machanics that create new strategies and only recycle old machanics. The game has gotten stale for me.
Yeah, i love commander + modern because of the insanely cool mechanics in magic. Cascade is miles better than like anything pokémon has ever made
My son and I just started playing Pokémon and while it's fun, it gets stale pretty fast. I think this is because their is so little interaction. The inclusion of a couple of supporters has made player engagement a lot better, but I hope they find some way to keep pushing that trend. "Going off" with a Chien-Poa on turn 2 after having gone through half my deck without human inter action is only fun for so long.
As a Yu-Gi-Oh player myself I watched pokemon tcg worlds for the whole weekend and I enjoyed it so much that I'm starting learning Pokemon tcg. Where can you get that "Winner's deck" for 30$ is it usable to play in tournaments ?
I have been playing Yu-Gi-Oh for 14 years now and I have been having so much fun learning Pokemon, both games are fun and it is on our side to keep enjoying all of them!
As of right now the world champion deck is $64 limitlesstcg.com/decks/list/8175
One thing about pokemon vs magic, i find it wayyyyyyy easier to teach pokemon than magic. I can get someone playing pokemon with basic proficiency in like... 15 minutes. Magic is so much more non-linear and interactive, so its less intuitive what to do at any time. Also most people already have a base familiarity with what pokemon is about. Both are fun, but pokemon is more fun for noobs.
Only thing that puts me off from Pokemon is the mons I like tend to not have a viable deck (like Scolipede being just starter deck filler), or it has one but from a very long time ago so it falls outside the locals formats they play.
Hopefully I'll get a real cool Scolipede deck in the future, lol
Tell me about it Volcarona has never been good lol
You might want to take a look at Volcarona V ;-) @@jgrimesey
Pokemon cards feel better when you open booster. A V Pokemon always gets you excited. In mtg you might not eaven be aware what you opened
Imagine a rainbow/aurora energy in magic.
There are various lands that have a similar effect: Cavern of Souls, City of Brass, Gemstone Mine, ... But all come with a drawback (i.e., a restriction on how you can spend the mana or opportunity costs).
@@nilsmuller9286 thanks
Mana Confluence has no drawbacks
@@MisterWebb maybe if you have a Phyrexian Unlife on the field, otherwise I would consider paying 1 life a drawback. 😄
@@nilsmuller9286 Good point - I stand corrected!
I’ve had some success in competitive mtg locally and after messing with Pokémon for a month or two it feels like the main difference between the two is that in mtg it feels like you can always make a play that gives you a chance to win a game but in Pokémon the outcome seems to come from who’s deck starts taking prize cards first
Definitely not true, 2 bdif, Giratina and Gardevoir both win from behind. Both are happy to go down by 3 prizes before winning.
I've been playing pokemon and I see the depth now. I'm trying to climb the ladder atm@@adtube666
"In magic maybe you can have like 3 or 4 actions per turn"
*laughs in krark sakashima*
*Maniacally cackles in Landfall
Pokémon is better in my opinion because for me the cards are dirt cheap and for a broke high school student thats pretty good 😂
Exactly!! Haha
I used to play Pokémon but the amount of times my opponent blew me out on turn 1 was way to high. Maybe the meta is an better spot now but I just can’t get behind a game where you potentially have no chance to play.
You have potentially no chance to play in any card game. It’s higher in pokémon though - Battle Pass is rotating next year so happy about that
Dude you should definitly play yugioh lol
My main gripe about Pokemon compared to magic is
In Pokemon it seems that most decks focus around powering up one big EX Pokemon and spamming one attack over and over until you win. The first person to draw enough energy to use that attack wins 90% of the time. In magic even if you threw down a 30/30 creature someone could cast a counter-spell or a murder card and that big bad is swiped into the graveyard instantly unless they counter your counter.
Magic is awesome because you never really know what your opponent will do. Wether a 100 rats or barely any creatures and just spells it gets wild
There's something about pokemon where you attack and end your turn and you know you're not gonna get countered, shot, insta death 💀
Pokemon end phase: I’ll attack and end turn with a full bench of guys 🥰
Magic end phase: Nothing I did this turn will matter my entire board is disappearing by my next turn
@@jgrimesey when i set this pokemon down on the board i know he wont get insta obliterated
Magic the gathering offers more flavor and complexity but the price can much higher.
Tbh, for me, in pokemon it relies a lot more on the player to win than the cards you're holding. Not that luck doesn't come into play once in awhile but I find that a lot of the times when I lose, it's my fault.
For mtg, top decks are usually worth thousands of dollars and how games are played feel like your deck does a lot of the carrying for you instead of putting in deep thought. Then in game 2, you have to have a good grasp on your opponent's deck and switch out cards from your main to sideboard and hope everything works out.
Still, I can't hold one game to be better than the other... Magic's artwork is probably the best in entire tcg gaming. The text is a bit longer in Magic but nothing like Yu-Gi-Oh. Its a bit biased but I can't do magic dirty.
I play pokemon before play commander. and I found this 100% accurate.
like when first time I play commander, I struggle to set up my board. cuz everything need mana. for draw, for play, for counter. so slow, no welder, no accelerated energy, need pricey thing to catch up pokemon speed.
but one think I like in magic, their ETB effect no need come from hand.
Imagine dedenne GX doesnt have to play from hand to discard card and draw 6
Buy pricey thing - have more fun
@@MisterWebb thank you for enlightment. Time to buy mana 0
@@inuishirou beg, borrow or steal - you must have a Mana Crypt, Mana Confluence and Jeweled Lotus
@@MisterWebb noted
I've played both and I would say that Pokemon is slightly better and more balanced
Even moreso now 💀 current meta decks in Pokemon have been in the rotation for a good bit, but that's a good thing when the design-space and banlist make them balanced against each other. Magic's Standard design and ESPECIALLY MH3 have proven your comment even more hilariously correct in retrospect.
Pokemon is STRONG and combo/lock heavy, but so are MTG and YGO. However, both have ridiculous, top-heavy expensive Metas mainly built around the "new new"
Keep making videos! Pro player 🎉
Wizards designed the Pokémon game and cards. They’re kinda the same game “backwards” - you know what I mean, the way you attach energies / lands work. I like the simplified. I play pokemon
I used to believe this, but I recently found out on a RUclips Pokémon card history binge that Creatures Inc. designed the Pokémon TCG and cards. Heavily inspired by magic of course, but wizards of the coast did not design the game. Wotc was responsible for publishing the cards in America
@@daviswojnovich307 that’s really good info I didn’t know. So they kind of copied the mtg game?
@@jijowajaknxanma3439 I mean, Magic was the first trading card game, so every trading card came technically copied them. Same is true for Yu-Gi-Oh.
@@daviswojnovich307 hmmm right. Very interesting. Which one do you perfer? I’m a Pokémon player.
I’m a mtg player who has been playing around with Pokémon and I want to ask, which game is harder at the top level.
And Digimon?
Awesome video
I played pokemon for a while and honestly i got bored of it pretty quickly. I found the game a little too consistent and simple. Ive been having a lot more fun playing commander.
I tried it like 5 years back. Felt more like solitaire. Same with yugioh nowadays too, which is why I quit/ I'm playing MTG now. Not of fan of turn one solitaire, I win cuz I went first. Pretty dumb
Its pretty turn one dependent now but the format is becoming a lot more skill driven imo (or maybe i was really bad back then)
MTG is pretty solitaire also. Once you get over the wall of text cards, every matchup is pretty similar.
Having looked into all of the big 3 pretty extensively now, by far Pokémon is the weakest mechanically speaking. The prize card system causing potential snowballing while also not always being very meaningful, lack of meaningful counterplay, and problem that the typing system being linked with the very energy used to attack all are huge redflags (surprisingly no one even talks about this last one even though it's basically the same as the dredge problem in Mtg in a roundabout way). All 3 suffer greatly from luck, so that area is kind of a wash. Mtg suffers from resource issues causing inequality, and yugioh suffers from overcomplexity that leads to OTKs too easily. Pokémon just wasn't fine tuned enough to start, so any changes that they've made to it haven't really solved its problems, and in some ways have just made them worse.
Manage to buildup an army in the back and save up to attack your opponent's big Pokémon? Well you just won that encounter and got bonuses for taking out their big threat, honestly they probably ought to just forfeit now because you are so far ahead. It makes a single victory possibly the only meaningful battle in the whole match.
1) prize system has its flaws but it is not a great issue and it does introduce some good variety to games. duel masters made it right.
2) the game is so designed. it is a take it or leave it thing. still some counterplay exists. having no sideboard means all decks are somewhat toolbox decks.
3) can you clarify your point please?
@@goncaloferreira6429 definitely agree that duel masters' version is way better.
Not sure what you're saying by "the game is so designed".
Which point(s) would you like me to clarify?
@@okeytay4 well, some of the problems you see are the definition of the game and the vision the company has for the game.
clarification: the part when you compare pkm energy with mtg´s dredge? something no one talks about?
@@goncaloferreira6429 So the dredge mechanic in mtg is infamous because the general mechanics of the game makes it a looping system of nearly automatic winners that is by it's very nature anti-competitive. Let me explain. Basically the dredge mechanic works in such a way that exploits the discard pile and general cost of playing cards in such a way that if a deck doesn't have counters to it, it basically gives the dredge player such an advantage that it is like an automatic win. Conversely, if you do have significant counters to dredge, it is such an advantage that you will win nearly every time. Because of the large investment of cards it takes to either use dredge effectively or counter it effectively, a deck playing against a deck prepared for dredge will also likely win nearly automatically because deck 1 is prepared for dredge and is starting with such niche cards. It stops being a game of mostly strategy where either side has a chance on any turn to win or get ahead, and becomes one of rock, paper, scissors where both players choose the same option every turn with the options being chosen before the players ever meet.
The type chart is exactly that, a slightly more complex version of rock, paper, scissors. The Pokémon video game has been criticized for this for years, but because of dual typing, held items, and abilities, it mitigates this to some degree. The tcg not only doesn't have any of this, it has a shallower move pool per Pokémon and makes you invest resources into a match up that could already be disadvantageous to begin with and lose those resources when the Pokémon goes away (or am I misremembering on that last point). Now the type match ups are actually more forgiving in the tcg than the video game, but they do still exist, and with only slightly more than half the single types than the tcg, this is yet another not great factor.
Dredge and pokemons' type system are anti-competitive because they automatically control the shape of the meta as long as they remain unchecked by the rules.
@@okeytay4 hum, i think we are talking about match ups and balance.
the dredge topic: dredge is broken as they pushed it too hard and it requires very specific answers. But mtg is a best of 3/5 game with sideboards and that means that overall dredge is "easy to counter" if the other players are expecting to face that deck.
Furthermore most tcgs often have this type of all-in strategies that can feel impossible to beat but are actually very beatable.
it seems yout opinions on pokemon are based more on the videogames? on the tcg i have always thought that the type system is a clever base rules safety vault that, optimaly, makes it impossible for any deck/type to dominate to much since the existance of the opposite type will always offer a counter to it.
But I care about the aesthetic. My kids play Pokémon. I play Magic. I don’t want to play a kid’s game, thanks.
I like the Pokémon aesthetic a lot, personally. But Magic is sick as well.
I liked the magic aesthetic as well, except now it’s slowly turning into fortnite with the crossover cards and I’m not into that lol
Why wouldn't you want to play Pokémon with your kids. I can't think of a single reason as to why you wouldn't play even to just teach them and spend time together.
@@chrislovelace1678 I did at the outset, but now they play with friends and I only have to play with them occasionally
They are both kids games.