When Did MtG Begin To Lose It's Artistic Integrity?

[wcm8]

In the original block of cards and up to a certain point, we had references to real-life poetry: Karakas, Will-o'-the-wisp, Scathe Zombies, Dark Banishing, Darkness, etc.

The artists were distinct as well. Sure some of it was goofy DnD/pulp-fiction style cover art (Melissa Benson for example -- no offense intended), but a lot of the artists had a great distinctive visual style: Quinton Hoover, Harold McNeill, Richard Kane Ferguson, Mark Tedin, Rebecca Guay, Drew Bader.

At a certain point, the 'New World Order' (likely motivated by money and expanding the company), changed MtG's target demographic to teenagers, and with it the assumption must have been that this demographic was more stupid. Gone were the real life literary quotations, slowly phased out were the quirky surreal artists... As the game itself became more complex with additional rules, the flavor behind it dumbed down considerably. Now it seems like every Magic block has the same 'actiony' digital comic-book styled art -- very few of the artists still active are that distinctive. Instead of quotes from Walt Whitman, we get plenty of cliched phrases from JaCe ThE MiNdScUlPtOr.

Now granted, I think of Magic cards more as complicated Chess pieces more so than envisioning myself as a planeswalker shooting lightning bolts from my hands. But with all the hub-bub about Chinese duplicates flooding the market, sites devoted to "speculation" and treating cards as stock options, kids getting ripped off by card sharks at the tournament circuit, etc. etc.... it just seems like we need to be faced with the question: is this game really worth saving? Should we really care about Hasbro's business interest? (Let me say that I don't want people like Mark Rosewater to be out of work... But I could care less about the investors behind the MLP monolithic branding.) But if the game's primary focus is money -- EVERY set now having the expectation of doing bigger and better things in order to move product -- is this really the game a conscious, feeling, thinking person should be playing? Where is the art and life? Even deck creation has been distilled into a science: mana curves, threat ratios, metagaming to the point of 73-card optimization... Having thousands of dollars wrapped up into pieces of cardboard suddenly seems sickening.

Just something to think about.

[nedleeds]

I think Harold McNeill is a neo con white supremacist now, so he might get behind the whole concentration camp thing.

[Maagler]

I'm not sure how the quote connects to the context...

[wcm8]

My point with the quote was that the references in Magic cards used to lead to other things. Someone curious about the flavor text on Wasteland might actually make the effort to read TS Eliot. Or specifically, the reason Findhorn forest is relevant is how it's related to a movie on Ebert's "great movies" list.

Now quotes and art are "terminal". Planeswalker quotes don't engage the imagination in the same way. The modern digital art doesn't inspire people to discover, say, Edmund Dulac or Gustav Klimt like Rebecca Guay's art might.

Richard Garfield was a very intelligent person, and beyond just making an amazing game he also generated a vehicle to have a small piece of cardboard engage the intellect on a higher, aesthetic level.

The newer sets do this to an extent with referencing Greek mythology and whatnot, but I think it'd be amazing if they actually quoted Aristotle or Homer, and if the artwork was occasionally in the style of Gaecian urns or mosaics. I know there are fringe examples where this is the case, but overwhelmingly the modern Magic model is one of banal conformity.

Edit: spelling

[clavio]

My point with the quote was that the references in Magic cards used to lead to other things. Someone curious about the flavor text on Wasteland might actually make the effort to read TS Eliot. Or specifically, the reason Findhorn forest is relevant is how it's related to a movie on Ebert's "great movies" list.

Now quotes and art are "terminal". Planes walker quotes don't engage the imagination in the same way. The modern digital art doesn't inspire people to discover, say, Edmund Dulac or Klimt like Rebecca Guay's art might.

Richard Garfield was a very intelligent person, and beyond just making an amazing game he also generated a vehicle to have a small piece of cardboard engage the intellect on a higher, aesthetic level.

The newer sets do this to an extent with referencing Greek mythology and whatnot, but I think it'd be amazing if they actually quoted Aristotle or Homer, and if the artwork was occasionally in the style of Gaecian urns or mosaics. I know there are fringe examples where this is the case, but overwhelmingly the modern Magic model is one of banal conformity.

Edit: spelling

I know what you mean. Even in the Invasion block I felt like the things Garard said in the flavor text was more interesting than the things Jace says.

Odyssey block was probably the last reasonable block flavor wise. Onslaught block had the whole Phage vs Akroma bit that I didn't care for.

I personally liked the flavor of Innistrad, but yeah I know what you mean. I still think Magic is worth saving because I love the game even if the flavor is some kind of bullshit now. I don't think a game like chess could ever fill the void.

[DarkJester]

I understand exactly what you mean. +1 for you. It was so satisfying in my youth to cast Scathe Zombies and listen to Iron Maidens "The Rime of the Ancient Mariner" :cool:. MtG even motivated me to read some "cultural precious" (do you understand what I try to say?) literature. (Example: Milton's "Paradise Lost" / aka Hellfire). Two of my favorite anecdotal's nowadays are Karakas and Will-O-The-Wisp.

[Bed Decks Palyer]

Hello wcm8, pretty interesting topic you've opened. I wish to write a little bit on this matter, but right now I'm drinking wine and playing pexeso with my beautiful wife, so maybe later. However, I'm glad you touched this subject!

[jamesh]

It has long been acknowledged that the way art is commissioned in MTG has changed dramatically since the 'old days'.

[Richard Cheese]

I'd trace it all back to them trying to introduce a cohesive storyline with recurring characters in Weatherlight. The art got boring, the flavor text got boring, and it just came out of nowhere. We're getting into the tropical vibe in Mirage/Visions, getting to know the Viashino and Teferi and friends, then all of a sudden they drop some generic white guy into the lead role. Every one of those characters was a shitty cliche, as was everything they said.

I come back 10 years later and the planeswalkers are just the new Gerrard and pals, except they make even less sense because I thought I was supposed to be the planeswalker here!

[GtF]

I couldn't agree more. The art used to be idiosyncratic and interesting, now it's all the same highly photoshopped highly predictable generic fantasy garbage. Same with the storyline, characters have gotten more generic, they never reference anything outside the game, let alone interesting poetry or literature like they used to. All of this is deliberate, as they must have figured out it sells more product. It's dissapointing though. When this counterfietting thing came up I found myself thinking the same thing. Not that I want magic to die, I think it's a great game, but it could be so much better (and was, in my opinion) in certain respects. The fact that all these (negative) changes were made to cater to the market and now its success in that market is threatening the integrity of the game seems pretty...well, appropriate.

[nedleeds]

HERE. I RULE! Wasn't that the slogan? I'll take Gerrard and hand painted Brom art work over anime goth pr0n Ashi0k and the other fucking garbage photoshop trash they pump out these days. But those days are long done, if it doesn't look like it was shat from a video game it won't hold the attention of the average retarded child.

[PirateKing]

Every once and a while Terese Nielsen comes out with some good art, like Descendants' Path, but the likes of Stasis are long gone.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

I thought this was going to be a thread for bitching about the all-the-same animu mage-punk bullshit of modern Magic art, not spewing pseudo philosophy about how comfortable upper-middle class white people who are somewhat bored with their jobs are just like being in a concentration camp.

Let's bitch about art instead.

I don't even mind the animu style so much, really, I just hate that it's all the same. I hate that you never see Rebecca Guay or Tony Di'Terlizzi or the Foglios anymore, people that did art that actually looked different, where you would say, "Oh, that's that person" before you even saw the artist name. I don't know anyone that does fucking Magic art anymore.

Part of that's also just that I think the current art director must be a lot more careless than the old about making sure that Magic card art actually looks good at Magic card size. I'm grabbing a random stack of RtR to flip through- Like I see Steam Vents, Sundering Growth might be interesting at a larger frame.

But at a small frame it's not lots of intricate details that make a piece interesting, it's the stylistic representation, and when they're going out of their way to make sure it all looks the same, well, it all looks the same.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Also the Eliot quote is from the JSS Wasteland, not the original. The original flavor text is, "The land promises nothing, and keeps its promise."

I do wish they would use more real world flavor text though.

[Lord Seth]

At a certain point, the 'New World Order' (likely motivated by money and expanding the company), changed MtG's target demographic to teenagers, and with it the assumption must have been that this demographic was more stupid. Gone were the real life literary quotations, slowly phased out were the quirky surreal artists... As the game itself became more complex with additional rules, the flavor behind it dumbed down considerably.
Ahem...

NEW WORLD ORDER HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ANY OF THAT!!!

New World Order was about a restructuring of rarity according to complexity, the idea being that they keep the more complicated stuff at the higher rarities (so established players can still use them) while keeping the less complicated stuff at the lower rarities (so new players, who will mostly be seeing commons, won't be as overwhelmed). That's all.

[Richard Cheese]

http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/qF2FGMOBsjM/hqdefault.jpg

Who the fuck is "Jace Beleren"?

[miguelmatix]

Today's art has lots of crappy and computer manipulated stuff. we still got some nice pieces but just look at RK post, Anson Maddocks and Terese Nielse works.
I really miss the old-school art.

[Aggro_zombies]

Like I see Steam Vents, Sundering Growth might be interesting at a larger frame.
I have a Steam Vents playmat and it looks gorgeous at that size. At card size, however, I think the original is much better.

That said, I do miss the Ice Age through Urza's era of Magic art quite a bit, and not just because I started playing with Portal and it feels like Wizards went out of their way to make that set visually diverse and appealing to capture more new players. That era had some goofy art, to be sure, but it also had a large range of styles and many iconic artists who don't do work for MtG anymore. It's a pity - today's art may be of more uniformly higher quality, but none of it really stands out as being memorable anymore.

[apple713]

Today's art has lots of crappy and computer manipulated stuff. we still got some nice pieces but just look at RK post, Anson Maddocks and Terese Nielse works.
I really miss the old-school art.

+10

the computer drawn stuff really blows imo and I wouldn't call it art. The old school art from saga and before was really good. The game is changing a lot ..and the art is going with it...

[wcm8]

There is a difference between 'art' and 'illustration'. I think what's happening is that the 'art director' has moved towards the cards being illustrations with a cohesive 'look'. If some young new artist were to submit something as garish as, say, Stasis, it'd never be accepted.

What they could do sometime is make a 'theme world' based on ART. The plot structure, card mechanics, and so forth could be based in some fashion on famous artists: Van Gogh Plains, Picasso Islands, Dali Swamps, Sorceries that look like Pollock paintings, planeswalkers drawn in the style of Klimt, a series of Andy Warhol creatures in each color to riff on his prints... It'd be like stepping into Delirium's world from The Sandman -- which itself was a previous source of inspiration for Arabian Nights.

And of course, the flavor text for this block/one-off set would have poetry from the real world: Poe, Dickinson, Frost, Longfellow, Baudelaire, Yeats, etc.

I'm being hopelessly romantic here. A game marketed towards 13-year old boys is not going to have this level of sophistication.

[ESG]

Well, I started playing at age 13, and I was drawn in primarily by the art, not the gameplay. The two or three people in my class who played didn't have a rule book with them, so they just taught from memory. Things were not by the book, but it gave a good idea of what the game was about. This was during Revised, BTW. I doubt I would have been drawn in these days if I were 13. The art today is pretty homogenous by comparison, and don't even get me started on the borders.

[Bed Decks Palyer]

[O]verwhelmingly the modern Magic model is one of banal conformity. It has long been acknowledged that the way art is commissioned in MTG has changed dramatically since the 'old days'. I'd trace it all back to them trying to introduce a cohesive storyline with recurring characters in Weatherlight. The art got boring, the flavor text got boring, and it just came out of nowhere. I come back 10 years later and the planeswalkers are just the new Gerrard and pals, except they make even less sense because I thought I was supposed to be the planeswalker here!



The art used to be idiosyncratic and interesting, now it's all the same highly photoshopped highly predictable generic fantasy garbage. Same with the storyline, characters have gotten more generic, they never reference anything outside the game, let alone interesting poetry or literature like they used to. All of this is deliberate, as they must have figured out it sells more product. It's dissapointing though. HERE. I RULE! Wasn't that the slogan? I'll take Gerrard and hand painted Brom art work over anime goth pr0n Ashi0k and the other fucking garbage photoshop trash they pump out these days. But those days are long done, if it doesn't look like it was shat from a video game it won't hold the attention of the average. I hate that you never see Rebecca Guay or Tony Di'Terlizzi or the Foglios anymore, people that did art that actually looked different, where you would say, "Oh, that's that person" before you even saw the artist name. I think the current art director must be a lot more careless than the old about making sure that Magic card art actually looks good at Magic card size. I do miss the Ice Age through Urza's era of Magic art quite a bit, and not just because I started playing with Portal and it feels like Wizards went out of their way to make that set visually diverse and appealing to capture more new players. That era had some goofy art, to be sure, but it also had a large range of styles and many iconic artists who don't do work for MtG anymore. It's a pity - today's art may be of more uniformly higher quality, but none of it really stands out as being memorable anymore. The game is changing a lot ..and the art is going with it...


There is a difference between 'art' and 'illustration'. I think what's happening is that the 'art director' has moved towards the cards being illustrations with a cohesive 'look'. If some young new artist were to submit something as garish as, say, Stasis, it'd never be accepted. What they could do sometime is make a 'theme world' based on ART.
I'm being hopelessly romantic here. A game marketed towards 13-year old boys is not going to have this level of sophistication. BTW. I doubt I would have been drawn in these days if I were 13.


I'm not sure if this is a correct way how to start the post, but as your quotes summed my thoughts quite EXACTLY, I think I may use them as my starting point. :really:


My main concern with modern Magic (esp. the last few years or so, but it started much sooner) is that it brings nothing special for me. Maybe this is due to the fact that I delved into the competitive scene with its "science: mana curves, threat ratios, metagaming to the point of 73-card optimization..." So instead of mourning over the loss of the old times, I should have admit that my trouble is in me, not in the game itself.
But nevermid, lets mourn. Time for some nostalgia and sentiment.

I remember when 17 years ago a friend of mine brought me to his house saying "today I'll learn you Magic, like it or not" and I was completely hooked in no more than half an hour. The game's complexity (remember, those were the old, pre-6th Ed. times) was astonising, of course, but at our level it wasn't that striking, the hardest part's been interrupts, regeneration (which I did understood, but always misplayed) and such small details. The flavour of game, though, was amazing, and I believe that it was 50:50 art vs. gameplay what hooked me. I dipped into the game and for the better part of those 17 years I never left it.

There were lots of cards that (even by the standards of past) were not really wonderful, but they still felt pretty special. I instantly fell in love with artists like Rebecca Guay, RKF, Drew Tucker and of course felt deep respect for the others, be it Rob Alexander, both Foglios; you name them. Many of the illustrations were really pleasing and distinct, what was especially notable, was the fact that they served the purpose and were created with the cards' size and use in mind: they were pieces of art, of course, but they also were distinguishable across the table. (Or on the carpet). I was overwhelmed by the beauty of many of them and (esp. the very old ones) were full of mystery and... emotions. Some strange sadness, like in case of Tabernacle, even irritant (Stasis), they were humorous, serious, and moreover, they all belonged together, although there were some many different artistic styles. Today's art is maybe similarly linked one to each other, but side by side with the Stone Age art, it's really different and the two look like from completely different games. And don't let me start on Modern frame, or on the flip/transform cards, thought the latter is more of a game design affair, than an art case.

Speaking of the old art, I also have this very special matter of mine, and you might not share my point of view, but w/e. Basically, the old cards were sober and even those that depicted vile and cruel deeds/beings were not really disgusting/occult. Yes, I know that I speak about sets that brought Sacrifice or Demonic Tutor or whatever, but there were many others, that were much more sane and sometimes they even seemed like a mockery of devil than his worship. I find many of nowadays art on (not only) black cards simply disgusting and several months ago I decided to not play black (however silly you may find it) simply for the reason I'd felt like I need to wash my hands every time I touched the cards.
I don't understand why (speaking of art, not exactly game design) there can't be more cards like Demonic Attorney and Cosmic Horror and Phyrexian Gremlins but instead we get one Avatar of Woe or Macabre Waltz or Ad Nauseam after another; otoh, maybe just the merciful oblivion took it toll on me, because fugly art was present all through the past (pun intended): sorry Thought Lash, you won't end on my wall.

I somehow liked how Drew Tucker offered the "censored" view (or maybe should I even dare to say "antique" or "classical") approach to violence, demise, decay: e.g. ICE Dark Banishing or Flare, the old Ashes to Ashes, all those were an example of art that depicted brutality but without been explicit. Sadly, Drew Tucker makes MtG art no more (except for few cards in Shadowmoor, his last contributions are decade old), and this is true form many other artists I liked.
Been explicit. That's what I find really saddening about the new art. It's not about PC graphic (although the medium used goes a long way towards the final goal; btw, do I have this phrase right?), as even an electronic art might be gorgeous and "touched", but the fact that 99% of generic MtG cards look like 99% of generic art for a generic PC game... is saddening.


Having said that all, I still believe that the title of this thread is a little bit misleading. Magic hadn't lost its artistic integrity, it was changed. The art of today is integral, but it's different from what we were used to fifteen years ago. But it holds together, and seen the sales figures (which is not exactly an argument about quality of art, of course), I guess that people are satisfied.
It's up to us, the older players, to mourn over the loss of our old home... :smile:


There are many many arguments against what I have written, the most blatant one is that it's impossible to create a completely integral artistic project, when it is composed of fifteen thousand different pieces made by hundreds of artist, especially if those pieces have other meaning than just been art. But I came here to defend the old art, so it's up to the younger players to defend the art of their era.

I'm more and more inclined to cash out at least from Legacy, as the direction the game is taking (visual/game design, target audience, affairs, financial aspects) are less and less bearable for me. I decided to keep Thresh for now, as the deck is quite solid and I like it. But I hope that our old playgroup ressurects and I may once again play the old cards and decks I liked.
I loved the "old" Legacy where you could have played your old deck for years, I loved the old pre-powercreep times when creatures like... I don't know... Werebear and Mystic Enforcer were useful and used. I may hole up in a conch for the years to come, pet with my Erhnamgeddon and Terrageddon or any other [insert-dude]geddon and just be done with it. Seems good.
Yeah, seems good.


I love old school magic.


EDIT: I don't understand how it's even remotely possible that I "discovered" Harold McNeill just few months ago. Of course, I always knew about his art, but what I meant is that only few months ago it finally struck me how mysterious his art is. (I guess that a "but but he's that racial racist!" post must come in no more than hour.) His site, though disturbing, is a fine example of how mysterious art should look like. Not that I like it, it's quite frightening and depressing and in fact I went quite a long road AWAY from mysterism, mystics and occult. But still, when I see mystic art, I recognize a duck.

[Seraph2k]

I love old school magic.


Good old times! When I was 13 years old, a classmate showed me his cards, then he explained the game to me. It was a first-turn love ;)
The tactical gameplay combines with beautifuy artworks and the flavortexts - one word: amazing!

Look at those old artworks from artists like Rob Alexander, Mark Poole, Melissa Benson and many others. They often show a nice symbiosis of card/ability and art. Thats the reason I still have all my cards!

But during the last years the digital art grew in popularity and so we can see these strange artworks. Some nice other ***. This progess won't stop, I think...

[Bed Decks Palyer]

I'd love if this person made MtG illustrations:
http://breathing2004.deviantart.com/gallery/

[miguelmatix]

I'd love if this person made MtG illustrations:
http://breathing2004.deviantart.com/gallery/

Love the retro look. I love it.

[Bed Decks Palyer]

Love the retro look. I love it.

Yes, it's amazing. You may look at one picture for ten minutes and still find some nice detail!

[miguelmatix]

Most of the art has now a computer/ program touch.

I miss Anson M, Melissa B, Brom, Terese N... They did some really good work.
Also, sets like Ice Age, Mirage, Arabian, etc have lots of mystic on them - that's something newer sets lack.

[Lord Seth]

Most of the art has now a computer/ program touch.

I miss Anson M, Melissa B, Brom, Terese N... They did some really good work.
Also, sets like Ice Age, Mirage, Arabian, etc have lots of mystic on them - that's something newer sets lack.
Terese Nielsen still does art for Magic... heck, 9 of her cards are from sets that are Standard legal right now (Blast of Genius, Call of the Conclave, Death's Approach, Dryad Militant, Enter the Infinite, Keening Apparition, Plea for Guidance, Ray of Dissolution, and Rest In Peace).

[Barook]

I miss the work of her brother, Ron Spencer, more.

I still don't know why they dropped him.

[death]

Went downhill from Urza's Legacy to Saviors of Kamigawa. From the new expansions, my favorite are New Phyrexia and Avacyn Restored.

[Technics]

There is a difference between 'art' and 'illustration'. I think what's happening is that the 'art director' has moved towards the cards being illustrations with a cohesive 'look'. If some young new artist were to submit something as garish as, say, Stasis, it'd never be accepted.

What they could do sometime is make a 'theme world' based on ART. The plot structure, card mechanics, and so forth could be based in some fashion on famous artists: Van Gogh Plains, Picasso Islands, Dali Swamps, Sorceries that look like Pollock paintings, planeswalkers drawn in the style of Klimt, a series of Andy Warhol creatures in each color to riff on his prints... It'd be like stepping into Delirium's world from The Sandman -- which itself was a previous source of inspiration for Arabian Nights.

And of course, the flavor text for this block/one-off set would have poetry from the real world: Poe, Dickinson, Frost, Longfellow, Baudelaire, Yeats, etc.

I'm being hopelessly romantic here. A game marketed towards 13-year old boys is not going to have this level of sophistication.

+100

That sounds like an AWESOME block!

[Beardless Viking]

I found this thread while searching for an interview mentioned by Richard Kane Ferguson on Facebook. Normally I don't spend much time on message boards, but this subject is very near to my heart.

Two years ago, I interviewed at WotC to be the Creative Manager for Magic. Dream Job and all that. Had some very thought-provoking conversations with the Creative team and many others, including Brady Dommermuth and Aaron Forsythe. We talked about artists and real-world flavor text any chance I got. A few days after the interview, I basically declined the position.

What I inferred, after thinking about the direction that Magic has taken, is that the Hasbro acquisition changed the game in some ways that cannot be reversed. M:tG became the single biggest source of revenue and profit for Hasbro, period. It has been the cash cow and still is. To bring in that revenue, they had to sell a lot of cards. To sell a lot of cards, they had to broaden the base of players. To broaden the base of players, it could no longer be made for college students; it had to be made for teens and pre-teens.

In conversations with art director Jeremy Jarvis during the interview, I pushed hard for distinctive art to make a comeback. Specifically, I mentioned Richard Kane Ferguson, the great work he does, and that the game loses something by missing out on him. What I gathered, based on the questions I was getting from people on the Creative team, is that they had to be very deadline-oriented, they were having troubled staying organized, and that there were more and more jobs that needed doing with the same 5 people.

The process as it currently exists for creating cards basically puts the artists in the position of least importance. Overall cohesion of mechanics and power level come first, and the art is essentially the caboose at the end of the train. Deadlines are extremely important, and the creative team long ago decided to have a concept artist create a style manual for each plane/species/clan/etc. The card artists aren't allowed to deviate from these templates. The team wants a homogeneity of appearance so that the world has a cohesive look and feel. Artists who shoot from the hip, miss deadlines, prefer to work in a very specific style, etc. have been therefore unwelcome.

A friend of mine works closely with Chris Rush, and the word is that Chris missed deadlines too often. Out he went. Many of the more cerebral or distinctive artists just aren't seen anymore, probably because they don't kowtow to a style guide. Anson Maddocks, Drew Tucker, Harold McNeil, RKF, Ron Spencer, Rebecca Guay, Brom... even Quinton Hoover (RIP) had to radically modify his erstwhile-unique style to get work from WotC. Look at Alpha-Revised staples such as Vesuvan Doppelganger, Earthbind, and Regeneration. Then look at the two cards Hoover did for Lorwyn. The Lorwyn cards just seem lifeless by comparison, probably because Hoover had to really rein himself in to get the work. I don't miss Doug Shuler's misshapen heads, but even his artwork was clearly identifiable as his.

Very few artists (Rob Alexander and Mark Tedin come to mind) have been able to evolve with the game over the years. Alexander and Tedin still do great work, but Tedin has had to cut back substantially on the surreal style of his early Magic pieces. Each block's new setting demands that artists be flexible, deadline-oriented, and frankly somewhat anonymous. And this is why you can't tell who does which piece anymore. The artwork we see these days is often digital and often almost photorealistically good; but without a signature in the corner, you wouldn't have any idea who was responsible for it.

I feel there should still be some room for Magic artists to just make what they want to make. The Core Set could be a good place for this, as well as for real world flavor text. Core Sets do not need to constantly make reference to other planes, but because Planeswalkers are so central to the game now (everybody has to have Chandra's Toothbrush!), the Creative team doesn't want to ever remove the focus from these settings. When every card refers to Jace's this and Liliana's that, there is no room for an artist to just do what s/he does best.

In an ideal world, the settings would be informed by artists' styles rather than the other way around. Having three or four artists work on just one world for years--rather than having many artists just get a couple of individual cards done each for next year's set--seems like a better way to go to attract and retain distinctive artists. But this, alas, is probably not possible.

[Lord Seth]

What I inferred, after thinking about the direction that Magic has taken, is that the Hasbro acquisition changed the game in some ways that cannot be reversed. M:tG became the single biggest source of revenue and profit for Hasbro, period. It has been the cash cow and still is. To bring in that revenue, they had to sell a lot of cards. To sell a lot of cards, they had to broaden the base of players. To broaden the base of players, it could no longer be made for college students; it had to be made for teens and pre-teens.Really? They haven't given too much detail on how much Magic brings in other than that it was $100 million in 2008 and $200 million in 2012 (this was, naturally, given in the context of bragging about growth), but compared to overall revenue, those don't seem so hot. Hasbro's overall revenue in 2008 was $4 billion, and it was $4.19 billion in 2012. That means that Magic was 2.5% and 4.8% of Hasbro's revenue respectively. I'm having trouble seeing how those equate to it being the biggest source of revenue for Hasbro.

I mean, don't get me wrong, it definitely brings in the cash, but it seems a far cry from being "the single biggest source of revenue and profit for Hasbro, period."

[Aggro_zombies]

Very few artists (Rob Alexander and Mark Tedin come to mind) have been able to evolve with the game over the years. Alexander and Tedin still do great work, but Tedin has had to cut back substantially on the surreal style of his early Magic pieces. Each block's new setting demands that artists be flexible, deadline-oriented, and frankly somewhat anonymous. And this is why you can't tell who does which piece anymore. The artwork we see these days is often digital and often almost photorealistically good; but without a signature in the corner, you wouldn't have any idea who was responsible for it.
It's not the signature in the corner that really matters, though. Perhaps I'm too philistine to appreciate the small differences in style that distinguish artists, but if I have to use the signature (or artist credit on the bottom of the card) to figure out who did what piece, it points deeper problems. It's true that today's pieces are beautifully rendered, but as has been said elsewhere, it's illustration Magic wants, not art. Illustration makes for cohesive, uniform worlds; illustration makes for easy brand development; illustration allows players to quickly and easily identify what's happening on a card. There's no reason to choose an artist with a distinctive style when you have your pick of a million art school grads who were all taught to fashion pieces the same way.

It's a shame, but Magic long ago left high fantasy behind, and when it abandoned that it was only a matter of time before the art followed suit.


I feel there should still be some room for Magic artists to just make what they want to make. The Core Set could be a good place for this, as well as for real world flavor text. Core Sets do not need to constantly make reference to other planes, but because Planeswalkers are so central to the game now (everybody has to have Chandra's Toothbrush!), the Creative team doesn't want to ever remove the focus from these settings. When every card refers to Jace's this and Liliana's that, there is no room for an artist to just do what s/he does best.
I agree with this wholeheartedly, but there's no room in the brand for deviant artistic visions. If you want a mass-market product you need a cohesive brand identity, and uniform, homogenous, high-quality illustration is the easiest way to achieve that.

[bruizar]

http://company.wizards.com/about/careers/sr-marketing-art-director-magic-job-renton-wa-us?careers-view=1

[Bed Decks Palyer]

Hello Beardless Viking, thanks for joining the Source and our discussion. You brought some very interesting info and some relevant points.

[thecrav]

I'm excited to hear what the anti-digital folks *cough*nedleeds*cough* think of the new MTGO art for Necropotence:

http://www.eternalcentral.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Necropotence-by-Udon.png

[Quasim0ff]

I'm excited to hear what the anti-digital folks *cough*nedleeds*cough* think of the new MTGO art for Necropotence:

http://www.eternalcentral.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Necropotence-by-Udon.png

ewwwww

[Barook]

What's wrong with the old art?

Didn't they want to pay further royalities for the old one? Because this version looks like crap.

[miguelmatix]

It looks like yugioh

[nedleeds]

It looks like yugioh

It looks like some fucking trap card from Yu Ghi Oh ... Skull Fire Dragon Penis Rocket

[Lt. Quattro]

I'm excited to hear what the anti-digital folks *cough*nedleeds*cough* think of the new MTGO art for Necropotence:

http://www.eternalcentral.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Necropotence-by-Udon.png

Sucks about as much as wizards price and rarity system for vintage masters.

[Myelectronicdays]

ewwwww

I generally have no idea what factors in to their decisions. but like most places.. im sure they have to get crunch quick turnaround illustrations finalized. and most of the freelance pool has pretty booked schedules.

[Michael Keller]

I'm completely biased because I'm basically a relic from this game's past, but Jesus I love the art from sets like The Dark. The set may not be the most powerful mechanically and from a design standpoint, but the Gothic, atmospheric overtones in the art on cards like Season of the Witch, The Fallen, etc. are just awesome.

That and All Hallow's Eve from Legends - just amazing. There was something intangible about early Magic card design that just screamed flavor. Some cards even broke the barrier of having good art and being generally good overall. I just miss when Magic was actually...Magic.

[death]

Sorry Wizards but that new Necropotence art (and Force of Will too) is just pathetic.

[H]

I generally have no idea what factors in to their decisions. but like most places.. im sure they have to get crunch quick turnaround illustrations finalized. and most of the freelance pool has pretty booked schedules.

Yeah, that just looks like it was absolutely rushed.

Decent concept, poor execution. It's becoming more common, see Olivia Voldaren.

[nedleeds]

I'm completely biased because I'm basically a relic from this game's past, but Jesus I love the art from sets like The Dark. The set may not be the most powerful mechanically and from a design standpoint, but the Gothic, atmospheric overtones in the art on cards like Season of the Witch, The Fallen, etc. are just awesome.

That and All Hallow's Eve from Legends - just amazing. There was something intangible about early Magic card design that just screamed flavor. Some cards even broke the barrier of having good art and being generally good overall. I just miss when Magic was actually...Magic.

+ a number approaching infinity

Some of it was just plain old awesome art. You could hang Blood Moon on your wall ... you could hang Karakas on your wall. This new crap isn't created as much as it's designed like game art assets are ... it really hit me when I went to watch something on YouTube and the intro to the match was one of the new god cards in full CGI animated glory swinging its dick around. It wasn't a piece of art, it was a video game asset purposely designed as such.

Edit: Necro is FUCKING Necro

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-c4MGi-Bl4-k/Uzb3qbpD73I/AAAAAAAADDQ/EfrYtz3F1fw/w1600-h1200-no/IMAG1286.jpg

[MoxMonkey]

I personally lost interest when it all went digital. I like to see how it went from sketch to full finished painting.

[Megadeus]

The Fallen

Wow that art is absolutely horrifying. Jesper does great stuff

[Urza, Grand Artificer]

Mold Demon was the worst and best art ever.

[Bertrand Hustle]

The thread title is sorta misleading. It should really read "When did MtG lose its artistic DIVERSITY" instead. Integrity isn't something as quantifiable as diversity in artists/styles, so I'll go with that as the rubric for my post. I initially didn't post in this thread because of "artistic integrity" in the headline.

I really do miss the Foglio art, Guay (I would kill for Guay to do more stuff...) art etc...

I do think my biggest gripe is how many pieces are computer colored, and there's even MIRRORING (Nykthos I am looking DIRECTLY AT YOU) in newer cards. Anyone can make Mana Confluence-esque blobs in Bryce/Maya/Blender pretty quickly. I do appreciate that everything isn't computer colored yet (I'm looking DIRECTLY at the beautiful Avacyn Restored Forest #243, but sadly this art is simply a recolor and slight rework of another!).]

What I'm really curious about is how the art style is target marketed and decided upon.

Like many users in this thread I share emotional attachments to the old art, but I think the best way to address this is in quantifiable/empirical terms and find concrete examples of laziness.

[MGB]

I honestly feel as if this has happened across the gaming industry, and even the music and film industries as well. This isn't isolated to art on Magic cards.

PC Games of the late 80s - mid 90s exhibited a depth of character and sophistication that disappeared once the Gaming industry became more popularly embraced and companies could no longer afford to spend time on a real, complex product and instead tried to attract as many pre-orders with flashy graphics (to the exclusion of spending time developing story, plot, and interactions) instead.

Whenever an industry or game becomes more widely adopted, the masses begin to dictate the depth - and usually the masses don't care for depth or sophistication instead of shiny, glitzy things. The companies are beholden to the bottom line, and the bottom line means that they have to produce what attracts the masses and not a niche group.

[wcm8]

The thread title is sorta misleading. It should really read "When did MtG lose its artistic DIVERSITY" instead.

I agree, and wish there were a way to modify thread titles after they've been posted.

There are exceptions to the rule on occasion, for example I think the art for Surgical Extraction is quite striking. But we get a lot of generic fluff for every card like that. To be fair, not every card is going to be heavily played or remembered aside from Limited. I wish they would spend a bit more time on the art direction of cards that they know are being designed with constructed play in mind.

[thecrav]

I honestly feel as if this has happened across the gaming industry, and even the music and film industries as well. This isn't isolated to art on Magic cards.

Soon all cards will have a poop-brown filter applied to them (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RealIsBrown)

Warning: The above is a TV Tropes link.

[zinedrei]

Richard Kane Ferguson

apologies, needed to really point this guy out.

i really admire his works. back then, it is very easy to identify cards he did the art for.

Wildfire Emissary, Nebuchad so on ....
i miss these types of art.

i dont know how you guys started playing Magic, I shifted from collecting NBA cards coz it's frustrating how a cards value can be decreased significantly just by a small dent or nick in a corner. unlike MTg card, a beat up Black Lotus will still give you 3 mana as long as it stays in a sleeve :)

i didnt care for the art or flavor back then but embraced the game.
however, after a few games, i started to appreciate the art and text more.

was the shift in art style to appeal to newer players?
does this mean people nowadays appreciate these types of art now?
or it still doesnt matter?