Discussion MagicTheGathering / GameplayTropes

Alright - Let's work out this Art Evolution thing here in discussion instead of going into an edit war over it, alright?

The text in question is the following:

• Compare some cards from the early years of the game to more recent cards.

To be frank, I don't think any part of the example counts, if the trope is defined narrowly as "A single artist with character designs changing slightly over time". If we accept that Tropes Are Flexible though, then there is a definite change in artistic style. With that said, I think the specific examples here fit more closely as an artistic subtrope of Early-Installment Weirdness.

I'd like to hear from you guys on this.

There has definitely been a significant change in the standards of quality of the artwork from the part of Wizards of the Coast, in that they have chosen/demanded higher and higher quality art in their cards as years have passed, and this can be clearly seen.

Is Art Evolution strictly restricted to art by one single artist, or can it be applied also to the change in quality standards imposed by a producer who commissions art, like in this case? My personal opinion is that the latter can also apply equally well, especially in such a clear-cut case as this one.

The general case of the game trending towards "more detailed, elaborate art" is already talked about in the first example (which gives Lord of the Pit and Scars of Mirrodin goblins as comparison points). I suppose more examples could be worked into it if you think that's necessary, but there certainly shouldn't be an extra bullet at the bottom elaborating on it—that's nattery.

As far as the boundaries of the trope itself, I'm not certain m'self, might be worth bringing to Trope Talk. I think those particular cards are probably not the best illustrations of the trope either way—I'd say it's more effective to use two different versions of the same card (like the aforementioned Lord of the Pit, original vs. modern reprint) or two cards by the same artist (like a Drew Tucker card from Shadowmoor or Eventide vs. a Drew Tucker card from Fallen Empires or The Dark).

Alpha Birds of Paradise versus M12 BoP

Alpha Llanowar Elves versus M12 Elves.

Alpha Lord of the Pit versus 10E Lord and Divine v. Demonic Lord.

What are your thoughts on those?

I have waited for a reasonable amount of time for the subject to be discussed and for a consensus to be reached, but it hasn't happened, and still nobody can give me a rational reason why my example is invalid.

Moreover, just read the examples in the Art Evolution page itself. A good chunk of them talk about art evolution in entire series/franchises (such as the majority of the examples under Western Animation), not about the art of individual artists.

I see no conceptual difference between the change in art style/quality in MTG as compared to for example the one in The Simpsons (or any of the other numerous examples there).

Thus I'm going to add my example once again. If you want to improve it by adding more examples or formatting it better, please do. However, persistent removal of the example would only amount to wiki vandalism. I hope this does not result in an edit war.

What do you mean nobody's given you a rational reason? I just explained it right there. It's a duplicate example. Ignoring the discussion, adding it back, and saying "I hope this does not result in an edit war" is just a passive-aggressive way of saying "This is an edit war."

Which example, exactly, is it repeating?

The first example says that artists are given more detailed art direction today than they they were in the past. That example shows exactly one card, and does not contrast it with anything. It's not an example of the actual card pictures, only something about the art directing.

If you feel so strongly that talking about the change in art direction and showing some actual cards as an example of how the art has changed is the exact same thing, then merge the two examples with proper editing, don't just remove the better one of them. (I'm wondering if you are applying a grandfather clause here because you don't seem to have a problem with a verbose-but-vague example about art direction, but you seem to have a big problem with an example that actually shows and contrasts card art, maybe because the former was on the page first?)

I'm not being passive-aggressive about this. I'm being aggressive, and I don't have a problem with it. I consider your consistent removal of an actual example to be wiki vandalism.

Adding a few words at the beginning of the first example and then removing my links to actual cards was not the kind of editing I was talking about. Good try. Try again.