03/21/2011 MM: "Looking in the Mirrodin"

30 posts / 0 new
Last post
This thread is for discussion of this week's Making Magic, which goes live Monday morning on magicthegathering.com.
This is a really nice piece. I like the use of the title plate structure to divide up the content. This article shows how diverse the backstory of a set's creation is. Many individuals, each with different creative concepts, contributes to produce something that is different (and hopefully better) than what any individual could come up with on their own.

I think the processes that WotC uses to foster a "creative environment" would make a good case study in business school. If I was ever trying to create the organizational structure for an ongoing creative project, I would model a lot of it on what we know of the r&d process for magic sets. If you compare Magic to, say, the videogame industry, I don't think there are any videogame production studios with the track record of Magic r&d. Miyamoto's work at Nintendo is an exception to the general rule that gaming franchises tend to become formulaic.
"The creatures in this set weren't the ones brought here. They were, mostly, the ancestors of those people."

Decendents. Not ancestors. Decendents.

I know, I know, subtle distinction. They're only, like, exact opposites and stuff.
Jeff Heikkinen DCI Rules Advisor since Dec 25, 2011
Dear MaRo:  This was a pretty good article content-wise, but the nameplate structure was terrible.  I want to read one article, scrolling from top to bottom; if it's a really good one I'll save it as one HTML file.  This one would have to be like six such files, skipping the nameplates - they're a complete waste of a page load.  This is obviously one of those things that only make sense in Hollywood.  Please never do this again.
My New Phyrexia Writing Credits My M12 Writing Credits
As far as the benefit of the rest of Magic is concerned, gold cards in Legends were executed perfectly. They got all the excitement a designer could hope out of a splashy new mechanic without using up any of the valuable design space. Truly amazing. --Aaron Forsythe's Random Card Comment on Kei Takahashi
Dear MaRo:  This was a pretty good article content-wise, but the nameplate structure was terrible.  I want to read one article, scrolling from top to bottom; if it's a really good one I'll save it as one HTML file.  This one would have to be like six such files, skipping the nameplates - they're a complete waste of a page load.  This is obviously one of those things that only make sense in Hollywood.  Please never do this again.


Dear willpell: You are crazy. (Though not as crazy as Natalie Portman in Black Swan, which I just saw.) This article was cool beans.   Though it is true that probably the same effect could be accomplished in one page, with some whitespace to space things out.


I liked this article a lot. It's really cool to get some idea of how these things develop, and it's good to get it down in writing so that no one forgets.  Though it's funny that MaRo says it's neither his nor Tyler's nor Brady's nor Jeremy's nor Matt's, 'cause reading the article, it sounds to me like it's Brady's.  But I guess that's just my impression.  And actually, looking at it again, I see that the wording doesn't suggest that at all.  I guess that just seemed like where the meat of the ideas came from, even though MaRo just calls them "snippets".

Didn't read it. "I totally was in show biz" is so last week. Fit it on one page or no deal.

I enjoyed the structure of following different people through the evolution of the world, but I strongly disliked how you put the title cards and segments on separate pages, requring clicks to move through. It's new and unique, but it's also obtrusive and hard to use. I think the article would have been better served using traditional headings instead.

And writing that just made me realize how much I've learned from Making Magic and how often I apply it, so I will also say this: thank you, Maro!
"The creatures in this set weren't the ones brought here. They were, mostly, the ancestors of those people."

Decendents. Not ancestors. Decendents.

I know, I know, subtle distinction. They're only, like, exact opposites and stuff.

I think it's safe to assume that MaRo knows the meaning of the word ancestors.  The sentence structure is a bit confusing, but if you take "they" to mean "the ones brought here," and "those people" to mean "the creatures in this set," then it makes sense.
Thanks to everyone who helped with the design of the plane of Golamo in the Great Designer Search 2!
My Decks
These are the decks I have assembled at the moment:
Tournament Decks (4)
Kicker Aggro (Invasion Block) Sunforger/Izzet Guildmage Midrange (Ravnica/Time Spiral/Xth Standard) Dragonstorm Combo (Time Spiral/Lorwyn/Xth Standard) Bant Midrange (Lorwyn/Shards/M10 Standard)
Casual Multiplayer Decks (50)
Angel Resurrection Casual Soul Sisters Sindbad's Adventures with Djinn of Wishes Sphinx-Bone Wand Buyback Morph (No Instants or Sorceries) Cabal Coffers Control Zombie Aggro Hungry, Hungry Greater Gargadon/War Elemental Flashfires/Boil/Ruination - Boom! Call of the Wild Teysa, Orzhov Scion with Twilight Drover, Sun Titan, and Hivestone Slivers Rebels Cairn Wanderer Knights Only Gold and () Spells Captain Sisay Toolbox Spellweaver Helix Combo Merfolk Wizards Izzet Guildmage/The Unspeakable Arcane Combo Niv-Mizzet, the Firemind and his Wizards Creatureless Wild Research/Reins of Power Madness Creatureless Pyromancer Ascension Anarchist Living Death Anvil of Bogardan Madness Shamen with Goblin Game/Wound Reflection Combo Mass damage Quest for Pure Flame Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle/Clear the Land with 40+ Lands Doubling Season Thallids Juniper Order Ranger Graft/Tokens Elf Archer Druids Equilibrium/Aluren Combo Experiment Kraj Combo Reap Combo False Cure/Kavu Predator Combo Savra, Queen of the Golgari Sacrifice/Dredge Elf Warriors Eight-Post Sneak Attack Where Ancients Tread Zur the Enchanter with Opal creatures Tamanoa/Kavu Predator/Collapsing Borders Esper Aggro Mishra, Artificer Prodigy and his Darksteel Reactor Theft and Control Unearth Aggro Soul's Fire Vampires Devour Tokens Phytohydra with Powerstone Minefield Treefolk Friendly? Questing Phelddagrif Slivers Dragon Arch Fun I'm probably forgetting a few...
People misuse the word "ancestors" like that constantly. Not new.

Also, the nameplate style is a Woody Allen reference, right? 
Dear MaRo:  This was a pretty good article content-wise, but the nameplate structure was terrible.  I want to read one article, scrolling from top to bottom; if it's a really good one I'll save it as one HTML file.  This one would have to be like six such files, skipping the nameplates - they're a complete waste of a page load.  This is obviously one of those things that only make sense in Hollywood.  Please never do this again.


Dear willpell: You are crazy. (Though not as crazy as Natalie Portman in Black Swan, which I just saw.) This article was cool beans.   Though it is true that probably the same effect could be accomplished in one page, with some whitespace to space things out.


I liked this article a lot. It's really cool to get some idea of how these things develop, and it's good to get it down in writing so that no one forgets.  Though it's funny that MaRo says it's neither his nor Tyler's nor Brady's nor Jeremy's nor Matt's, 'cause reading the article, it sounds to me like it's Brady's.  But I guess that's just my impression.  And actually, looking at it again, I see that the wording doesn't suggest that at all.  I guess that just seemed like where the meat of the ideas came from, even though MaRo just calls them "snippets".



I concur with Delnai.  Breaking up each person's story with a title card was novel, and gave the article a little dramatic punch, as each person is brought in to fill in their piece of the puzzle.  So it was far from terrible.

Incidentally, willpell, you are incorrect about having to save the article as multiple files (and that each section is a page load).  When I was reading the article, I clicked on MaRo's wedding article link, then when I hit back in Firefox, I was taken all the way back to the start of this article.  Being a programmer, I got curious about how the page is structured (so I'm really not being snide about your comment Smile).  When you 'View Source' from anywhere within the article, you can see that all the content is contained within a single HTML file; the links invoke JavaScript that selectively displays the next section.  I saved the page using Firefox's 'Save as Web Page, complete', and got an HTML file (plus all the supporting stuff) that, when opened, allowed me to click through the whole article.  Kind of a clever design, and it solves the "frequent page load" argument repeated in the forums after a few of MaRo's more experimental articles, but it unfortunately doesn't work with links and the back/forward browser buttons.  I think Google solved this for Gmail by jamming a special entry (which contained a snapshot of the web app's current state) in the browser's history whenever a user clicked a link that did some custom navigation within the page.  Then clicking the back button accessed the special entry, and allowed the web app to just reset itself to the saved state.  *Anyway*, sorry about the technical blabbering.  Nice article, MaRo.
Seconding Jeff re ancestors/descendants. Also, last page, you spell checked a bit too aggressively - Solitari, not Solitary. 

Re the article structure, not a bad idea, but I'd make two changes. One(and this isn't aimed at MaRo, but at whoever does the technical stuff), each page having its own URL would be vastly better than using Javascript, so that we could use forward/back buttons in the intuitive manner, as well as link to pages. Two, nameplate as a big image at the top, then scroll down to content, no need to make them two pages. 
"The creatures in this set weren't the ones brought here. They were, mostly, the ancestors of those people."

Decendents. Not ancestors. Decendents.

I know, I know, subtle distinction. They're only, like, exact opposites and stuff.



Sorry to nitpick a nitpicker, but I couldn't help myself:

Descendants. Not decendents. Descendants.

Also, there's *slight* chance it's correct the way MaRo wrote it, although massively confusing -- 'they' could be 'the ones brought here', and 'those people' could be 'the creatures in this set'. All together: "The ones brought here were, mostly, the ancestors of the creatures in this set."  But I definitely agree that 'those people' goes better with 'the ones brought here', and the whole thing is extremely vague.
I think it's safe to assume that MaRo knows the meaning of the word ancestors.  The sentence structure is a big confusing, but if you take "they" to mean "the ones brought here," and "those people" to mean "the creatures in this set," then it makes sense.

Then the complaint becomes that it's a grammatical error rather than a usage error; "they" should in that context be the main subject of the previous sentence, not something mentioned incidentally as part of the verb clause.


Also, the nameplate style is a Woody Allen reference, right? 

I'm pretty sure it predates his birth. You might find this relevant.

Jeff Heikkinen DCI Rules Advisor since Dec 25, 2011
I'm also on the fence about the format. The nameplate structure is kind of cool but it makes all the parts of your story unconnected. You are trying to tell a single story, and it gets kind of lost in all the smaller stories you are telling. The format is really cool but probably better used for a more loosely connected topic.

Besides that, I liked the article a lot actually. I really love the offbeat stuff and most of them are hits. This one just felt like you were trying to do two things at the same time.

I think Mark understands ancestors vs decendants, he just got clumsy with pronouns.  "They were, mostly, the ancestors of those people" is a clumsy sentence whichever word you choose.


And I liked the title plates.  I felt they needed music though.

If you're on MTGO check out the Free Events via PDCMagic and Gatherling.

Other games you should try:
DC Universe Online - action-based MMO.  Free to play.  Surprisingly well-designed combat and classes.

Planetside 2 - Free to play MMO-meets-FPS and the first shooter I've liked in ages.
Simunomics - Free-to-play economy simulation game.

Well, so far, I am one of three who disliked the structure, three others did like it, and two are ambivalent (if I've counted right).  So clearly if MaRo wanted to generate buzz (which I think in general he does), he got his wish.  I suppose it doesn't hurt to experiment once in a while.

My objection would have still existed, but been less strong, if the nameplates had shown a picture of the person instead of just black behind the name (I still have no idea what Matt Wilson looks like).  And I also second the "page header instead of previous page" idea.
My New Phyrexia Writing Credits My M12 Writing Credits
As far as the benefit of the rest of Magic is concerned, gold cards in Legends were executed perfectly. They got all the excitement a designer could hope out of a splashy new mechanic without using up any of the valuable design space. Truly amazing. --Aaron Forsythe's Random Card Comment on Kei Takahashi
I really liked this article.  The title plate structure makes it easier to read since you have sections on smaller screens (similar to pages in a book) rather than one single page blurb.  I tend to skim really long articles because if it didn't really grab my attention from the start I don't really "read" the whole thing.  However, breaking the article down into smaller chunks allowed me to hold more interest and read the whole thing.  I do agree with others that the nameplates either needed a picture or were at the top of a page rather than on a seperate page.

The article content was good too.  Mirrodin is one of my favorite worlds and I like learning how the concept came to be.  I just wish that the Mirrans in SoM block had more effort put into them.  Right now they just seem to be kind of there while the Phyrexians are dealt with heavily.
IMAGE(http://pwp.wizards.com/1205820039/Scorecards/Landscape.png)
Good idea for the article, it got me interested, but down the line began to lose interest.

I think the problem was that the titles only mimicked the style, but weren't effective. This story isn't like the movies, it's a story written by someone about someone, so the titles are decentralizing.

1) The titles have no creative thought. They are of people, but unlike the movies, their title doesn't give the viewer any hint of the direction of this segment. They understand it's going to be about a person, but for all they know that person is a dog trainer or something. (The only way to know the direction is if you know the people, and basically the story, already; people, like, well you.)

2) The titles are about people! In bottom title cards it is accompanied with an image that showcases that person and gives cues as to the kind of person or conflict. In Tarantino scene titles, you clearly get a distinct idea about what's going to happen, and a hint about how it's going to happen.

So the overall problem for me was that it was about creators that lead to the creation. That's obvious from a behind the scenes view, but in movies you see the creation and then that leads to the style of the creator.

Every section talked about a person and then their design, which was more boring than if it had been the other way around. I think the title needed to hint at the next part of the plane's story, and then connect those that were transported over to the project. Movies need suspense and substance, behind-the-scenes is only used after its over. You have to either pick movie or extra content for the style of the article.

I think it could have been fascinating if the titles were hints at what was to come, then opened with a problem, then introduced the wandering hero that was placed in the way of the problem, and finally some closue but substance that made you realize the conflict of the movie wasn't over.
I didn't hate the title plates, but they didn't really do anything for me either.

Also, we're totally in Block 2 of 3 right now, it's just that the story line has changed from the original pitch.
I really liked this article.  I think it's only natural to be a bit confused by the layout because there's SO MUCH INFORMATION here that it would be even more confusing if it wasn't sectioned off.  There's a lot of history about how Wizards works here... which mostly comes down to their hiring process being "I know a guy who knows a guy..." haha.  I found it interesting you guys laid the seeds for Phyrexia in Mirrodin, but I didn't get it when Scars came out.  All I got from the current storyline was that Karn just happened to have a drop of oil on him and brought it to Mirrodin.  How coincidental! 

I think the most facinating part was the pitch of the 3-year arc you were thinking of.  I'm not sure where this Phyrexian thing is going, but it feels to me like there's going to be an Act 3 somewhere down the road. 

My prediction is that Bolas has something to do with it all.  ;)
I didn't hate the title plates, but they didn't really do anything for me either.

Also, we're totally in Block 2 of 3 right now, it's just that the story line has changed from the original pitch.



I assumed they were (very) early iterations of Mirrodin, Odyssey and Zendikar, respectively.
I wonder... of the people who liked it, how many use the mouse to scroll? Of those who disliked, how many use the keyboard? If, when reading, your hand is already on the mouse, it'd be less annoying... but for those of us who read with our hands on the keyboard it's a major obstruction.
For me it wasn't even that. I found it annoying as I do the majority of his gimmicks. I realize they have bills to pay but I am not clicking umpteen times to get through a single article. When he wants to go back to a normal-looking article, I'll read. (Well, not next week, as we've been warned of more Roseanne.)

Although to answer your question, I typically scroll down with the keyboard. 
Breaking it up into sections about different people was interesting, but making us click through a graphic to get to the next section really slowed things down and broke up the flow.  So in my opinion this was a partial success - the narrative structure was good but the layout/user interface were bad.
I wonder... of the people who liked it, how many use the mouse to scroll? Of those who disliked, how many use the keyboard? If, when reading, your hand is already on the mouse, it'd be less annoying... but for those of us who read with our hands on the keyboard it's a major obstruction.


Mouse, to the point of feeling lost without a wheel - and at least a fourth button set to be equivalent to clicking Back. So I didn't mind the layout much, and was initially confused by the people saying it added significant extra time or clunkiness.
Jeff Heikkinen DCI Rules Advisor since Dec 25, 2011
Mouse, to the point of feeling lost without a wheel - and at least a fourth button set to be equivalent to clicking Back. So I didn't mind the layout much, and was initially confused by the people saying it added significant extra time or clunkiness.

+1.

Put me at Like on the Hate/Dislike/Neutral/Like/Love scale.

Magic Judge Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Rules Theory and Templating: "They may be crazy, but they're good." --Matt Tabak, Rules Manager*
I loved the content and loved the format.  I thought it was perfect for the way the content was broken up into distinct sections.  It allows each person to have their time in the spotlight rather than being "inferior" to anyone else simply because they're "below" the other person's section.
Well, so far, I am one of three who disliked the structure, three others did like it, and two are ambivalent (if I've counted right).  So clearly if MaRo wanted to generate buzz (which I think in general he does), he got his wish.  I suppose it doesn't hurt to experiment once in a while.


Chalk me up for dislike. It didn't ruin the article (like the twitter bologna sandwich I refuse to read), but it was irksome and didn't really add anything for me.

Also, lol Solitary Lancer

Zammm = Batman.

It's my sig in a box
58280208 wrote:
Everything is better when you read it in Bane's voice.
192334281 wrote:
Your human antics and desire to continue living have moved me. Just kidding. You cannot move me physically or emotionally. Wall humor.
57092228 wrote:
Copy effects work like a photocopy machine: you get a copy of the 'naked' card, NOT of what's on it.
56995928 wrote:
Funny story: InQuest Magazine (I think it was InQuest) had an oversized Chaos Orb which I totally rooked someone into allowing into a (non-sanctioned) game. I had a proxy card that was a Mountain with "Chaos Orb" written on it. When I played it, my opponent cried foul: Him: "WTF? a Proxy? no-one said anything about Proxies. Do you even own an actual Chaos Orb?" Me: "Yes, but I thought it would be better to use a Proxy." Him: "No way. If you're going to put a Chaos Orb in your deck you have to use your actual Chaos Orb." Me: "*Sigh*. Okay." I pulled out this huge Chaos Orb and placed it on the table. He tried to cry foul again but everyone else said he insisted I use my actual Chaos Orb and that was my actual Chaos Orb. I used it, flipped it and wiped most of his board. Unsurprisingly, that only worked once and only because everyone present thought it was hilarious.
My DM on Battleminds:
no, see i can kill defenders, but 8 consecutive crits on a battlemind, eh walk it off.
144543765 wrote:
195392035 wrote:
Hi guys! So, I'm a sort of returning player to Magic. I say sort of because as a child I had two main TCG's I liked. Yu-Gi-Oh, and Pokemon. Some of my friends branched off in to Magic, and I bought two pre-made decks just to kind of fit in. Like I said, Yu-Gi-Oh and Pokemon were what I really knew how to play. I have a extensive knowledge of deck building in those two TCG's. However, as far as Magic is concerned, I only ever used those two pre made decks. I know how the game is played, and I know general things, but now I want to get in the game for real. I want to begin playing it as a regular. My question is, are all cards ever released from the time of the inception of this game until present day fair game in a deck? Or are there special rules? Are some cards forbidden or restricted? Thanks guys, and I will gladly accept ANY help lol.
I have the same problem with women.
117639611 wrote:
198869283 wrote:
Oh I have a standing rule. If someone plays a Planeswalker I concede the game. I refuse to play with or against people who play Planeswalkers. They really did ruin the game.
A turn two Tibalt win?! Wicked... Betcha don't see that everyday.

The Pony Co. 

Is this my new ego sig? Yes it is, other Barry
57461258 wrote:
And that's why you should never, ever call RP Jesus on being a troll, because then everyone else playing along gets outed, too, and the thread goes back to being boring.
57461258 wrote:
See, this is why RPJesus should be in charge of the storyline. The novel line would never have been cancelled if he had been running the show. Specifically the Slobad and Geth's Head talkshow he just described.
57461258 wrote:
Not only was that an obligatory joke, it was an on-topic post that still managed to be off-topic due to thread derailment. RP Jesus does it again folks.
92481331 wrote:
I think I'm gonna' start praying to Jesus... That's right, RPJesus, I'm gonna' be praying to you, right now. O' Jesus Please continue to make my time here on the forums fun and cause me to chuckle. Amen.
92481331 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
It was wonderful. Us Johnnies had a field day. That Timmy with the Grizzly bears would actually have to think about swinging into your Mogg Fanatic, giving you time to set up your silly combo. Nowadays it's all DERPSWING! with thier blue jeans and their MP3 players and their EM EM OH AR PEE JEES and their "Dewmocracy" and their children's card games and their Jersey Shores and their Tattooed Tenaged Vampire Hunters from Beverly Hills
Seriously, that was amazing. I laughed my *ss off. Made my day, and I just woke up.
[quote=ArtVenn You're still one of my favorite people... just sayin'.[/quote]
56756068 wrote:
56786788 wrote:
.....would it be a bit blasphemous if I said, "PRAYSE RPJAYSUS!" like an Evangelical preacher?
Perhaps, but who doesn't like to blaspheme every now and again? Especially when Mr. RPJesus is completely right.
56756068 wrote:
I don't say this often, but ... LOL
57526128 wrote:
You... You... Evil something... I actualy made the damn char once I saw the poster... Now you made me see it again and I gained resolve to put it into my campaign. Shell be high standing oficial of Cyrix order. Uterly mad and only slightly evil. And it'll be bad. Evil even. And ill blame you and Lizard for it :P.
57042968 wrote:
111809331 wrote:
I'm trying to work out if you're being sarcastic here. ...
Am going to stop you right there... it's RPJesus... he's always sarcastic
58335208 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
112114441 wrote:
we can only hope it gets the jace treatment...it could have at least been legendary
So that even the decks that don't run it run it to deal with it? Isn't that like the definition of format warping?
I lol'd.
56287226 wrote:
98088088 wrote:
Uktabi Orangutan What the heck's going on with those monkeys?
The most common answer is that they are what RPJesus would call "[Debutantes avert your eyes]ing."
56965458 wrote:
Show
57461258 wrote:
116498949 wrote:
I’ve removed content from this thread because off-topic discussions are a violation of the Code of Conduct. You can review the Code here: www.wizards.com/Company/About.aspx?x=wz_... Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks. You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively. If you wish to report a post for Code of Conduct violation, click on the “Report Post” button above the post and this will submit your report to the moderators on duty.
...Am I the only one that thinks this is reaching the point of downright Kafkaesque insanity?
I condone the use of the word Kafkaesque. However, I'm presentely ambivalent. I mean, that can't be serious, right? We're April 1st, right? They didn't mod RPJesus for off-topic discussion when the WHOLE THREAD IS OFF-TOPIC, right? Right.
57545908 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
Save or die. If you disagree with this, you're wrong (Not because of any points or arguements that have been made, but I just rolled a d20 for you and got a 1, so you lose).
58397368 wrote:
58222628 wrote:
This just won the argument, AFAIC.
That's just awesome.
57471038 wrote:
57718868 wrote:
HOW DID I NOT KNOW ABOUT THE BEAR PRODUCING WORDS OF WILDING?! WHAT IS WRONG WITH ME?!
That's what RPJesus tends to do. That's why I don't think he's a real person, but some Magic Card Archive Server sort of machine, that is programmed to react to other posters' comments with obscure cards that do in fact exist, but somehow missed by even the most experienced Magic players. And then come up with strange combos with said cards. All of that is impossible for a normal human to do given the amount of time he does it and how often he does it. He/It got me with Light of Sanction, which prompted me to go to RQ&A to try and find if it was even possible to do combat damage to a creature I control (in light that Mark of Asylum exists).
71235715 wrote:
+10
100176878 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
57078538 wrote:
heaven or hell.
Round 1. Lets rock.
GG quotes! RPJesus just made this thread win!
56906968 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
143359585 wrote:
Blue players get all the overpowerered cards like JTMS. I think it's time that wizards gave something to people who remember what magic is really about: creatures.
Initially yes, Wizards was married to blue. However, about a decade ago they had a nasty divorce, and a few years after that they began courting the attention of Green. Then in Worldwake they had a nasty affair with their ex, but as of Innistrad, things seem to have gotten back on track, and Wizards has even proposed.
You are my favorite. Yes you. And moments like this make it so. Thank you RPJesus for just being you.
On what flavor text fits me:
57307308 wrote:
Surely RPJesus gets Niv-Mizzet, Dracogenius?
56874518 wrote:
First: I STILL can't take you seriously with that avatar. And I can take RPJesus seriously, so that's saying something.
121689989 wrote:
I'd offer you a cookie for making me laugh but it has an Upkeep Cost that has been known to cause people to quit eating.
56267956 wrote:
I <3 you loads
57400888 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
"AINT NO LAWS IN THE SKY MOTHER****." - Agrus Kos, Wojek Veteran
10/10. Amazing.
A working fallback for disabled javascript would have been nice.
Content was vaguely interesting. Structure was really annoying. You've got (as in, dailymtg.com has) those nice standard "section header" images that you use in other articles; use them. Don't break the standard web page interaction model. Don't make us click more links than we have to. (See also: Elegance ;) )

I'm one of those who uses the mouse (wheel) to scroll, but I really don't like moving the pointer around unnecessarily. Also, I don't like having to click a rather small four-character "Next" link to get to the next bit of the article. The title pages would work in a TV documentary, I guess, but are just meaningless delays and obstructions in an article format. Just put it all inline and be done with it.
Sign In to post comments