'SLICK' Custom Playing Cards (KS) - RELAUNCHING, NEW DESIGN

[badpete69]

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/2004436691/slick-custom-playing-cards

[Don Boyer]

Minimalist courts - interesting, even attractive, though I probably would have left out the blood dripping from the King of Diamond's axe.

Interlinking huge-numbers "spotless" spot cards - not to my liking.  Aren't spot cards simple enough in the first place?  Plus I can already imagine people getting confused by the sixes and nines that look too much like each other.  It's why those cards have spots in the first place.

Value-in-pip indices with values off-center - ??

Card back and tuck box - dull as dishwater, despite being a nice shade in the vicinity of purple, lilac and lavender.

Overall grade: meh.

[Afrank8]

I actually didn't mind the initial look of the tuck box but the rest left a little to be desired in design terms foremost among them probably being the back design for me.

[tyl3r]

Personally, do not like the look of this deck at all, as Dan mentioned the interlinking numbers on the pip cards are weird, especially the 6's and 9's.
As for the courts, they don't make any sense to me, there are hands coming out of heads, swords coming out of beards, just looks odd to me. I do enjoy minimalist designs, but this one doesn't catch my fancy. I'm sure it's different for others. I wish him all the luck in getting funded.

[Don Boyer]

Personally, do not like the look of this deck at all, as Dan mentioned the interlinking numbers on the pip cards are weird, especially the 6's and 9's.
As for the courts, they don't make any sense to me, there are hands coming out of heads, swords coming out of beards, just looks odd to me. I do enjoy minimalist designs, but this one doesn't catch my fancy. I'm sure it's different for others. I wish him all the luck in getting funded.

Those courts were the one thing I did like.  It was minimalist yet still managed to represent the court conventions found in a modern Anglo-American deck - one-eyed vs. two-eyes, which weapons/flowers/etc. are held by which courts, etc.

The rest...not so much.

[PurpleIce]

I always like to applaud designers for trying new stuff, and this (the courts), is a nice try.

As Don mentioned (while i was typing this reply), he managed to have a minimalist feel, while still being able to represent the characteristics of each court.

But the rest of the cards are...normal. Maybe he is trying to be "slick", but the back and tuck is really boring to me.

[Rob Wright]

Courts are nice enough, and I kind of like the interlocking numbers. I don't think they match each other in theme. Tuck and back- blah.
Maybe it's just me, but I think I've seen very similar courts on another deck.

[Shebhnt]

The numbers remind me of Skip-bo

[Olly Swinyard]

Hey, I am the designer for this deck and your comments are really helpful! Although I am not willing to change the faces of the deck I have been getting a lot of negative feel back about the back design which I am willing to change and make more detailed and interesting.

 If anyone has any general tips or ideas on how I could make the back better please feel free to comment, I will not be offended.

The more feedback the better!

Thanks,

Olly

[Don Boyer]

Hey, I am the designer for this deck and your comments are really helpful! Although I am not willing to change the faces of the deck I have been getting a lot of negative feel back about the back design which I am willing to change and make more detailed and interesting.

 If anyone has any general tips or ideas on how I could make the back better please feel free to comment, I will not be offended.

The more feedback the better!

Thanks,

Olly

First, welcome to the Discourse.  If you have some time, stop by the Introduce Yourself board and make a topic so everyone can get to know you a little better.

I understand a desire for a certain amount of artistic integrity, in regards to not wishing to change the faces.  But if that integrity gets in the way of making backers happy, it could become a problem that keeps funding levels lower than you'd like.

Consider a compromise - instead of placing a pair of pips in the background in light grey, remove them and in the leftover negative space put in the proper amount of pips in total and in the same color and shade as the indices.

Also consider an old convention used in some card games that rely on a big number in the middle of the cards: add a banner with the numeral's name (or at least a thick line) under the numbers for the 6 and 9 spot cards.  USPC failed to do this when they introduced "Poker Peek" playing cards at the 2007 WSOP Championships.  The players complained so much, they ended up digging around, found some old, still-sealed decks from 2006 and replaced the new decks with the old ones for the remainder of the tournament.  Even with a design tweak, they're not exactly what I'd call popular.

[Olly Swinyard]

Thanks Don, this is really great advise and appreciate you took the time to do this!

I'll start on the changes and see how they look.

I'll be sure to post them back to you see what you think.

Thanks again,

Olly 

[Shebhnt]

A way to tell the difference between 6 and 9 is very much needed.  Also, I think you should change the number in pip thing you have in the corners, they can be a little hard to read and don't really feel like they go with the rest of the design.

As far as the back goes, I feel like it is just missing something.  I'm all for simple and minimal design but if it isn't done just right it will come off more lazy than beautiful.  I like the idea but I feel like it is almost too minimal.

[badpete69]

I am not quite sure what you guys mean by the 6 and 9 issue. They are totally different and you can easily tell them apart no matter how you spin the card?

EDIT: Plus let me add that logically you have to look at the card from top to bottom so you know immediately if you are looking at a nine or a six no matter how you turn the card

[Shebhnt]

You would think that but you would be how many people will get confused by it.  It's why every major card game (for example Uno) puts the line there.

[Don Boyer]

I am not quite sure what you guys mean by the 6 and 9 issue. They are totally different and you can easily tell them apart no matter how you spin the card?

EDIT: Plus let me add that logically you have to look at the card from top to bottom so you know immediately if you are looking at a nine or a six no matter how you turn the card

USPC used to think the same thing...before the 2007 WSOP tournament...  It really fell under the category of "epic fail", especially when they wrote the commissioner's name - misspelled - on the card back...  But hey, it could have been worse - a couple of their employees could have been bribed by a couple of players to include a MARKING SYSTEM in the back of the cards - oh, wait, that DID happen, at the 2011 tournament!!  Yeah, it makes you wonder how they manage to keep their contract to provide the official cards of the WSOP.

It's not impossible that in a tired, addled moment, a player will confuse the two values, especially when looking at them in the flop and you're sitting on the farthest seat.  (Or at least use that as an excuse when they foul the hand up.)  Basically, when using two-headed cards and dealing with numerals that look like a different numeral when flipped over, it's better to have markers to indicate either the bottom of the numeral (thick line below number) or the numeral's name spelled out somewhere (banner with name on it).

[badpete69]

Good argument Don but I would never use this deck to play a hold'em tournament or any other poker game. To me this is just a collector deck (maybe).  By the way I have a regular hold'em tournament I organize and a while back  I decided to bring the blue and red Ace Fulton decks. Worst deck to play poker with as I quickly found out with many confusing the spades and clubs. We threw away the decks very quickly and moved to standard decks hehehe

[Don Boyer]

Good argument Don but I would never use this deck to play a hold'em tournament or any other poker game. To me this is just a collector deck (maybe).  By the way I have a regular hold'em tournament I organize and a while back  I decided to bring the blue and red Ace Fulton decks. Worst deck to play poker with as I quickly found out with many confusing the spades and clubs. We threw away the decks very quickly and moved to standard decks hehehe

...and that was one of the many reasons I never picked up the Ace Fulton's decks...

There's so many AWESOME cards out there, custom decks that are perfect for poker.  How ironic is it that the ones that are named after a fictitious casino are among the worst choices?

But regarding this deck, I get the impression that it was made to be played, especially with a name like "SLICK".  I thought it was odd that Olly mentioned he couldn't make the deck with USPC because he was in the UK.  Big Blind Media's been doing it for a few years - Olly, did you do your homework on this?  I'm assuming you've opted for using Cartamundi instead, based on the printer being in Belgium.  I have yet to find a really good Cartamundi deck, but from what I hear of British decks, most of them could practically be beat by a deck made on newsprint, so perhaps it's not a bad choice.  Consider using card-shark.de - they do a lot of card work, both through USPC and their own print shop.  Their own decks are pretty good, and they know about making trick decks and gaff cards - imagine being able to offer a tier with a stripper deck option!

[Olly Swinyard]

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/2004436691/slick-custom-playing-cards/posts/775788

New back design idea?? if you could check it out on the link above that would be great. ( I didn't know how to post images).

 

[Olly Swinyard]

Good argument Don but I would never use this deck to play a hold'em tournament or any other poker game. To me this is just a collector deck (maybe).  By the way I have a regular hold'em tournament I organize and a while back  I decided to bring the blue and red Ace Fulton decks. Worst deck to play poker with as I quickly found out with many confusing the spades and clubs. We threw away the decks very quickly and moved to standard decks hehehe

...and that was one of the many reasons I never picked up the Ace Fulton's decks...

There's so many AWESOME cards out there, custom decks that are perfect for poker.  How ironic is it that the ones that are named after a fictitious casino are among the worst choices?

But regarding this deck, I get the impression that it was made to be played, especially with a name like "SLICK".  I thought it was odd that Olly mentioned he couldn't make the deck with USPC because he was in the UK.  Big Blind Media's been doing it for a few years - Olly, did you do your homework on this?  I'm assuming you've opted for using Cartamundi instead, based on the printer being in Belgium.  I have yet to find a really good Cartamundi deck, but from what I hear of British decks, most of them could practically be beat by a deck made on newsprint, so perhaps it's not a bad choice.  Consider using card-shark.de - they do a lot of card work, both through USPC and their own print shop.  Their own decks are pretty good, and they know about making trick decks and gaff cards - imagine being able to offer a tier with a stripper deck option!

I was going to get it printed by Cartimundi who said they would be able to create the same level of deck as DMC Great White, but so many people are put off by the fact that it won't be printed by USPCC that I'll try and get it printed by them and see what they say. In all honesty, I did think that USPCC don't print for anyone outside the UK but apparently I am wrong, which could work out for the best.

[Shebhnt]

Got you covered Olly:

[Olly Swinyard]

Thanks Shebhnt,

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/2004436691/slick-custom-playing-cards/posts/775899

Above is a link to another potential change to the Number cards, any feedback again would be great!

[badpete69]

There you go Olly

[Shebhnt]

I like the change to the numbers, still not sold on the back design.  It is better than the original though so it is a step in the right direction.  I just feel like it now has too much going on.... I Probably just sound like an angry man who won't can't make up his mind 

[Olly Swinyard]

I like the change to the numbers, still not sold on the back design.  It is better than the original though so it is a step in the right direction.  I just feel like it now has too much going on.... I Probably just sound like an angry man who won't can't make up his mind 

Haha its alright, I do prefer this new back design to the old. I know I went from one extreme to the other but hopeful people will react to it better than the old.

[Lukeout]

The numbered cards with doubled up pips confuses me - The "4" has 8 pips on it. For a deck that seems to skew young, that's probably not a great feature. I do like the back though.

[badpete69]

From our friend Olly

SLICK Cancelled ….. New and better deck coming soon!

Hey guys,

Since starting the project I have received a wave of comments and ideas that will make the deck much better and as I didn't want to keep with this deck when I know its not the best it could be I have decided to cancel the project.

I am really sorry for the disappointing news but a new SLICK design will be up on Kickstarter with the next week or two.

I am really excited for this new deck and hope you like it as much as do.

Sorry again but trust me, this new deck will be awesome so keep an eye out on Kickstarter!

Thank you so much for all your support,

Olly

[Anthony]

I still think canceling is the kiss of death, OK you know it's not gonna hit it's goal. You know what you want to change, do it during your campaign, if nothing else let your backers see that your listening and trying to make adjustments. I would think you would have a much better chance of backers jumping on board with attempt two at that point, no?

[Don Boyer]

I still think canceling is the kiss of death, OK you know it's not gonna hit it's goal. You know what you want to change, do it during your campaign, if nothing else let your backers see that your listening and trying to make adjustments. I would think you would have a much better chance of backers jumping on board with attempt two at that point, no?

He was reaching the point where the project as originally presented was looking less and less like the project as it looked towards the end.  It's not fair for the backers who liked and expected the end result to look like the original concept.

[badpete69]

I agree with Don here.  I see this cancelling as a sign of strength and it does show he has been listening to comments Sparkz. That is the main reason he is cancelling.  It is ok to pause, redesign and relaunch.  More power to him

[Anthony]

It's not fair for the backers who liked and expected the end result to look like the original concept.

Actaully thats a very good point, I hadn't thought about it that way, Thanks.

[Olly Swinyard]

As Don said my main reason for cancelling was to not irritate my previous backers. I know if after I backed a project and then they started changing everything I wouldn't be happy.

I have decided to go for a more traditional style deck this time as I feel there are more possibilities. I am pretty much changing everything besides the name and the court cards, which means the big interlinking numbers are gone. Below are the new 'Front of tuck box design' and '10 of spades' so you get the idea. (both aren't final yet!)

With the box, I want it to be embossed with a silver foil which I think will look awesome.

Again any feedback would be much appreciated!   

[Shebhnt]

I like it more now, I did like the large numbers but I feel the cards do look more "slick" (at least what I imagine when I hear the word).  Will the back design look like that which is on the box?

[Olly Swinyard]

I like it more now, I did like the large numbers but I feel the cards do look more "slick" (at least what I imagine when I hear the word).  Will the back design look like that which is on the box?

I'm glad you like it. Yeah the back will be the same one I posted earlier this week, (with all the squiggles).

[adelsan]

I feel that it lacks a general concept which binds everything together.
This design is simple, not minimal.
Minimal is an approach that is more difficult than you think.
I'd suggest to make a more fun an complex project, train your eyes in the detail. After that you'll be sure that a minimal approach will be more honest and truthful.

[Don Boyer]

I wouldn't make a claim of "300 gsm" on the box like you have here.  USPC doesn't use grams per square meter to measure its stock.  It's a long story, but the end result is that they offer two stocks, period - a standard weight (Bicycle) and a heavier, casino weight (Bee Casino) which come in a range of thicknesses.  The customer can only select the range, NOT the precise thickness.  It's bizarre, but it's how they roll.  Even worse is that the ranges overlap.

Bee Casino is the more expensive of the two and because USPC doesn't make the tuck boxes for that stock in-house, it adds something like eight weeks to the manufacturing time needed.  Some people like to upgrade to Bee Casino because of the greater durability, some prefer using Bicycle because it's a fine stock, not as costly and can be obtained nearly two months sooner.

[Olly Swinyard]

I wouldn't make a claim of "300 gsm" on the box like you have here.  USPC doesn't use grams per square meter to measure its stock.  It's a long story, but the end result is that they offer two stocks, period - a standard weight (Bicycle) and a heavier, casino weight (Bee Casino) which come in a range of thicknesses.  The customer can only select the range, NOT the precise thickness.  It's bizarre, but it's how they roll.  Even worse is that the ranges overlap.

Bee Casino is the more expensive of the two and because USPC doesn't make the tuck boxes for that stock in-house, it adds something like eight weeks to the manufacturing time needed.  Some people like to upgrade to Bee Casino because of the greater durability, some prefer using Bicycle because it's a fine stock, not as costly and can be obtained nearly two months sooner.

Thanks Don for letting me know. I'll get on it.

[Don Boyer]

I wouldn't make a claim of "300 gsm" on the box like you have here.  USPC doesn't use grams per square meter to measure its stock.  It's a long story, but the end result is that they offer two stocks, period - a standard weight (Bicycle) and a heavier, casino weight (Bee Casino) which come in a range of thicknesses.  The customer can only select the range, NOT the precise thickness.  It's bizarre, but it's how they roll.  Even worse is that the ranges overlap.

Bee Casino is the more expensive of the two and because USPC doesn't make the tuck boxes for that stock in-house, it adds something like eight weeks to the manufacturing time needed.  Some people like to upgrade to Bee Casino because of the greater durability, some prefer using Bicycle because it's a fine stock, not as costly and can be obtained nearly two months sooner.

Thanks Don for letting me know. I'll get on it.

If you haven't already, before you lift up your stylus and make the next design alteration, you should really contact USPC's International Department.  International handles the custom work from clients outside of the country rather than the Custom Department.  I'm told it can be a nuisance dealing with the extra layer of bureaucracy, but you need to get things set up with them NOW in order to expedite the process when the project is closed and funded.  Without doing it now, you could be adding weeks if not months to the card-making process!  You can't even accurately set a goal for delivery if you haven't already kicked things off with them.

[BiggerDee]

Great changes, I like these much better. I will be a backer on these.

[Olly Swinyard]

I wouldn't make a claim of "300 gsm" on the box like you have here.  USPC doesn't use grams per square meter to measure its stock.  It's a long story, but the end result is that they offer two stocks, period - a standard weight (Bicycle) and a heavier, casino weight (Bee Casino) which come in a range of thicknesses.  The customer can only select the range, NOT the precise thickness.  It's bizarre, but it's how they roll.  Even worse is that the ranges overlap.

Bee Casino is the more expensive of the two and because USPC doesn't make the tuck boxes for that stock in-house, it adds something like eight weeks to the manufacturing time needed.  Some people like to upgrade to Bee Casino because of the greater durability, some prefer using Bicycle because it's a fine stock, not as costly and can be obtained nearly two months sooner.

Thanks Don for letting me know. I'll get on it.

If you haven't already, before you lift up your stylus and make the next design alteration, you should really contact USPC's International Department.  International handles the custom work from clients outside of the country rather than the Custom Department.  I'm told it can be a nuisance dealing with the extra layer of bureaucracy, but you need to get things set up with them NOW in order to expedite the process when the project is closed and funded.  Without doing it now, you could be adding weeks if not months to the card-making process!  You can't even accurately set a goal for delivery if you haven't already kicked things off with them.

Alright will do! Thanks for the advice.

[Olly Swinyard]

Great changes, I like these much better. I will be a backer on these.

Cheers BiggerDee, glad you like it!

[PrincessTrouble]

I like the new designer better too.  Maybe add "New Design" somewhere in the title of the thread so people come back here and see the new design.  I just clicked on this thread by chance, since I had decided a while ago (based on the old design) not to back the project and had been skipping the topic.

[Don Boyer]

I like the new designer better too.  Maybe add "New Design" somewhere in the title of the thread so people come back here and see the new design.  I just clicked on this thread by chance, since I had decided a while ago (based on the old design) not to back the project and had been skipping the topic.

Already done!

[Olly Swinyard]

I'm going to start posting 'working processes' of my designs just so you guys get an idea of where I'm going.

Again let me know what you think and any suggestions on how to improve it.

-Unfinished Ace of Spades:

[Don Boyer]

I'm going to start posting 'working processes' of my designs just so you guys get an idea of where I'm going.

Again let me know what you think and any suggestions on how to improve it.

-Unfinished Ace of Spades:

What's the squiggle in the index for?  The wavy line between the value and suit?  It's not very attractive.

I've said this what feels like a million times - keep the index SIMPLE.  They're meant to be quickly read and recognized with no margin for error unless you're stinking drunk.  Anything that doesn't work toward that reduces the functionality - that's fine if it serves a purpose in the theme of the deck, but if it doesn't and you just wanted something quirky to make your index look different, please, DON'T.

[Olly Swinyard]

New Spade Numbers:

[Olly Swinyard]

Sorry they're are coming so slow! Apparently I have tonsillitis so its slowing me down a bit.

New Spade and Diamond Court Cards:

[badpete69]

Project is live again

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/2004436691/slick-luxury-custom-playing-cards

[verloren]

FYI, back and tuck are different from what you posted.

[Don Boyer]

Ollie, Ollie, Ollie - why did you cheapen this and use a stripped-down standard joker that doesn't even fit the design theme?

[Olly Swinyard]

Ollie, Ollie, Ollie - why did you cheapen this and use a stripped-down standard joker that doesn't even fit the design theme?

Looking back at it I completely agree!! Here's a new design which I think fits better.

Let me know what you think before I stick it on KS

[Olly Swinyard]

Here's a bigger version haha,    not sure if the pips work btw

[Don Boyer]

Here's a bigger version haha,    not sure if the pips work btw

Hmm...  What pips?  Jokers don't have pips.  Indices, on the other hand - plural for index - that, they have. 

Why not make the joker in the same pattern/style as the court cards instead of the spot cards?

[Olly Swinyard]

Here's a bigger version haha,    not sure if the pips work btw

Hmm...  What pips?  Jokers don't have pips.  Indices, on the other hand - plural for index - that, they have. 

Why not make the joker in the same pattern/style as the court cards instead of the spot cards?

haha same thing

If you mean just doing the face of the joker, I tried that and it didn't really work tbh. Ive been messing around with it for a while and actually feel this one works the best. 

[vmagic]

I would like this one more if the court cards were better and it wasn't so pricey.

[Don Boyer]

Here's a bigger version haha,    not sure if the pips work btw

Hmm...  What pips?  Jokers don't have pips.  Indices, on the other hand - plural for index - that, they have. 

Why not make the joker in the same pattern/style as the court cards instead of the spot cards?

haha same thing

If you mean just doing the face of the joker, I tried that and it didn't really work tbh. Ive been messing around with it for a while and actually feel this one works the best.

Why not show it and let us see which would be better?

[Olly Swinyard]

Here's a bigger version haha,    not sure if the pips work btw

Hmm...  What pips?  Jokers don't have pips.  Indices, on the other hand - plural for index - that, they have. 

Why not make the joker in the same pattern/style as the court cards instead of the spot cards?

haha same thing

If you mean just doing the face of the joker, I tried that and it didn't really work tbh. Ive been messing around with it for a while and actually feel this one works the best.

Why not show it and let us see which would be better?

Here you go:

[Afrank8]

Looks a lot better without the indices, much cleaner.

[Don Boyer]

Why not show it and let us see which would be better?

Here you go:

I think that number 3, with a simple "star in a cirle" image (a fairly common choice) or even just a star as the index, would perfectly fit the aesthetic of this deck.