Paragon Bicycle® Playing Cards by Shape Shifters Playing Cards (KS)

[Rob Wright]

Paragon Bicycle® Playing Cards

[Don Boyer]

Wow.  Where to begin?

Bicycle logo shown in a manner which USPC will likely reject?  Check.
Overly-baroque back design?  Check.
Faux-aged paper look, just because they can?  Check.
Incredibly over-designed pips and indices?  Check.
Said pips being all the same color except for the indices?  Check.
Plague doctors as jokers for no special reason?  Check.
3-D Computer-generated court characters???  What the what???  That is just nucking futs!


The most original concept in the entire design is the least-likeable - computer-generated courts in an "old-timey" aged deck!  Everything else looks like borrowed concepts from first- and second-tier designs made by others.  The courts appear exactly like extras from a Renaissance Faire - right clothing, but a modern appearance otherwise, including the Queens' hairstyles - and COMPUTER-GENERATED IN THREE DIMENSIONS.  And the eyes - all dull and lifeless!  In drawing a playing card, it's the hands that are difficult to make well - in comp-gen art like this, it's the eyes.


I have nothing against computers as creative tools, but something about 3-D art like this doesn't work well.  Countless low-budget animators and comic book artists tried 3-D but the people always looked a little too unreal, a little too phony - when was the last time you saw a new 3-D comp-gen comic or cartoon, especially one that didn't look like crap?


Wanna look baroque?  Go baroque!  Wanna look high-tech a la the 1990s?  Go high-tech a la the 1990s!  Going both directions at once is too much of a stretch.

[CthulhuWho1]

Here's an example of the Twitter promo I just posted for these cards:

http://twitter.com/CthulhuWho1/status/580082798704209920

[ddhburns]

I have to say, as a complete newbie to card collecting, I'm rather taken with them! 

[PurpleIce]

Wow.  Where to begin?

Bicycle logo shown in a manner which USPC will likely reject?  Check.
Overly-baroque back design?  Check.
Faux-aged paper look, just because they can?  Check.
Incredibly over-designed pips and indices?  Check.
Said pips being all the same color except for the indices?  Check.
Plague doctors as jokers for no special reason?  Check.
3-D Computer-generated court characters???  What the what???  That is just nucking futs!


The most original concept in the entire design is the least-likeable - computer-generated courts in an "old-timey" aged deck!  Everything else looks like borrowed concepts from first- and second-tier designs made by others.  The courts appear exactly like extras from a Renaissance Faire - right clothing, but a modern appearance otherwise, including the Queens' hairstyles - and COMPUTER-GENERATED IN THREE DIMENSIONS.  And the eyes - all dull and lifeless!  In drawing a playing card, it's the hands that are difficult to make well - in comp-gen art like this, it's the eyes.


I have nothing against computers as creative tools, but something about 3-D art like this doesn't work well.  Countless low-budget animators and comic book artists tried 3-D but the people always looked a little too unreal, a little too phony - when was the last time you saw a new 3-D comp-gen comic or cartoon, especially one that didn't look like crap?


Wanna look baroque?  Go baroque!  Wanna look high-tech a la the 1990s?  Go high-tech a la the 1990s!  Going both directions at once is too much of a stretch.

I agree. Too much going on in this deck and not in a very good way.

I am curious though...

"Bicycle logo shown in a manner which USPC will likely reject?"

Why so?

[Don Boyer]

I am curious though...

"Bicycle logo shown in a manner which USPC will likely reject?"

Why so?

USPC is exceptionally particular about the presentation of their logo.  Last I heard, project creators don't even get to place the logo when the box goes to press - USPC does it for them.  It's the same reasoning behind why they don't allow alterations of the Rider Back anymore - they're using trademark law to protect it, because it's not likely to still be covered under copyright law.  As a trademark, they can't allow any "dilution" of it in the form of modified versions of the standard.  To do so would invite dissolution of the trademark itself.

[Leif]

I don't know, I kinda like some of the separate elements, but together with the aged paper and those thingies at the sides, the frame fetish and the banners behind the indices, it's just too much. What's up with all the banner-behind-the-indices decks, btw? And those eyes really does look rather lifeless. I think they could remove some stuff and get a better looking deck.

[ruicorreia]

I can't see anything in this deck I can say I like.

[Justin O.]

I really like the color pallete. And would love to see the character illustrator's other work.

[chas0039]

Takes all kinds, doesn't it.  I, for one, hope it funds.  All the above comments are valid, but I would enjoy owning these.

[Collector]

Creators are strange people to communicate.

[sprouts1115]

Don't partially like borders around the indices.  It pushes the indices inward.  Also, his suit indicators are mostly gold.  The quick fix is to make the suit indicators more red if they are Hearts or Diamonds and more Black if Clubs or Spades.  If the cards are laid out on the table it's hard to know what the suit is especially if you have custom courts.  I like that he has a Red and Black Joker, but the "REKOJ" need to read "JOKER" from top to bottom.  This image might be a mistake?    Doesn't make any sense to put "Joker" in the top right corner.  on his Red Joker.

[HankMan]

This image might be a mistake?    Doesn't make any sense to put "Joker" in the top right corner.  on his Red Joker.

I am pretty sure the Joker was more of indicator to let everyone know that they are looking at the 2 Joker cards.
Just like how he had that for the "Hearts", "The Back Design", "The Ace of Spades"

[Don Boyer]

I have to say, as a complete newbie to card collecting, I'm rather taken with them!

I have to say something here, something I should have mentioned earlier.

For all new collectors: please feel free to COMPLETELY IGNORE the opinions of the other people posting good or bad comments about the features of any given deck.  If you like it and can afford it, buy it; if you hate it, don't - it's as simple as that.  We are NOT the be-all and end-all authorities on what constitutes the "perfect" deck of cards, because there is NO SUCH THING as the "perfect" deck for all occasions and all people.  No one is under any obligation to agree with or disagree with any of the opinions you see here.  Even when we try to speak objectively about a deck, the heart wants what the heart wants, so if you think it's an awesome find, then go ahead, buy it in confidence that no one here will think any less or more of you for doing so!

Remember, folks, it's a hobby - if it's not fun, what's the point?