Front Page

Content

Authors

Game Index

Forums

Site Tools

Submissions

About

You May Also Like...

S
Sagrilarus
September 22, 2023
T
thegiantbrain
November 12, 2020

Bouldering

Staff Blogs
O
oliverkinne
April 27, 2020
Hot
SI
san il defanso
December 10, 2019
Hot
SI
san il defanso
December 02, 2019
Hot
SI
san il defanso
November 18, 2019
Hot
SI
san il defanso
October 03, 2019
Hot
SI
san il defanso
September 18, 2019
Hot
SI
san il defanso
September 11, 2019
Hot
SI
san il defanso
September 04, 2019
Hot
SI
san il defanso
August 27, 2019
Hot
SI
san il defanso
August 21, 2019
Hot
MB
Michael Barnes
August 13, 2019
Hot
SI
san il defanso
August 12, 2019
Hot
SI
san il defanso
August 05, 2019
Hot
SI
san il defanso
July 29, 2019
Hot
  • Staff Blogs
  • Barnes on Games- Scythe Roundtable, Mansions of Madness in Review

Barnes on Games- Scythe Roundtable, Mansions of Madness in Review

Hot
MB Updated
Barnes on Games- Scythe Roundtable, Mansions of Madness in Review

Game Information

There Will Be Games

Three stars separate this game from the other one...

Scythe is freaking great, but if you expect to be the Next Great 4x game...you're not going to like it. Not only that, but I think you are misinterpreting what this game is trying to accomplish. It is a hybridized design that skews MUCH more Euro than things like the Matagot games do, and it sort of challenges the expectations that we tend to have for 4x designs. This is one of few 4x games where it's not really a DoaM game with some upgrades on a sprawling tech tree. It's an economic game that also has a little combat and extremely focused development. Some will undoubtedly find it too restrictive and controlled, others will discover that you can approach this game in a number of ways to get those stars on the board.

So we did a roundtable review of it at the Review Corner- I gave it full marks because I think it is a bold, beautiful design that may not necessarily do anything "new", but it remixes some seasoned concepts and comes out with something very fresh. Pete played the role of the detractor, and there's a little "controversy" because he turned in a 3 star rating and I bumped it down to 2.5. I felt his opinion was more toward "it's not that great" than "it's pretty good" and I adjusted it to match up better with our review key. So he's right in the middle. The roundtable review is here.

Now, on my own I reviewed Mansions of Madness 2nd Edition. It is...pretty bad. I always felt like the game had potential, but it turns out that when you take away the "overlord" player, you wind up adventuring by reading repetitive prompts and putting out tokens where the app tells you. And then it tells you what happened when you touch one of the tokens on the screen. After, of course, you make a ton of boring skill checks. The puzzles are cute at first, but just like in the old game they are a time-wasting novelty that doesn't actually add much to the game. The stories are decent, but really you are just futzing around, picking things up, getting modifiers, and then rolling skill checks. I think apps are much better for games that aren't about human-to-human storytelling. Here's the two star takedown.

There Will Be Games

Michael Barnes (He/Him)
Senior Board Game Reviews Editor

Sometime in the early 1980s, MichaelBarnes’ parents thought it would be a good idea to buy him a board game to keep him busy with some friends during one of those high-pressure, “free” timeshare vacations. It turned out to be a terrible idea, because the game was TSR’s Dungeon! - and the rest, as they say, is history. Michael has been involved with writing professionally about games since 2002, when he busked for store credit writing for Boulder Games’ newsletter. He has written for a number of international hobby gaming periodicals and popular Web sites. From 2004-2008, he was the co-owner of Atlanta Game Factory, a brick-and-mortar retail store. He is currently the co-founder of FortressAT.com and Nohighscores.com as well as the Editor-in-Chief of Miniature Market’s Review Corner feature. He is married with two childen and when he’s not playing some kind of game he enjoys stockpiling trivial information about music, comics and film.

Articles by Michael

Michael Barnes
Senior Board Game Reviews Editor

Articles by Michael

Log in to comment

Msample's Avatar
Msample replied the topic: #232869 26 Aug 2016 14:30
I'd say after reading Pete's comments, 2.5 stars is still generous. A lot of what he says resonates with me, and confirms my decision to skip this game.
Gary Sax's Avatar
Gary Sax replied the topic: #232870 26 Aug 2016 14:34
Perfect opportunity for a head to head, real disagreement over major issues.
SuperflyPete's Avatar
SuperflyPete replied the topic: #232874 26 Aug 2016 15:22
I still think this is Jamey Stonemeier trying to redefine 4x as something completely different, which serves no one but Stonemeier games and dilutes the lexicon.

It's like someone saying "well, I made a baseball game" but the game is actually a game about bowling.

He's not stupid. He knows that standing out in the crowd for a Euro isn't easy. He also knows that ...some... folks are OK with stretching the lexicon to include shit it most assuredly should not. So, he used that to his advantage to sell the game.

Good on him for quality PR and salesmanship.

I still think it's a spreadsheet game that, while well designed, isn't terribly compelling.
Msample's Avatar
Msample replied the topic: #232877 26 Aug 2016 15:51
But he certainly nailed the presentation . This was one of the more frequently played games in open gaming at WBC last month and it was certainly eye catching. These days, like it or not that can make up some bland game play .

Speaking of which, the other one that saw a lot of table time was the new MARE NOSTRUM. Any opinions on that one ?
SuperflyPete's Avatar
SuperflyPete replied the topic: #232879 26 Aug 2016 16:24
Yeah, from a beauty standpoint, the CE version of the game is astounding. The version that has wooden resources is mehtastic though.

Mare Nostrum is only really awesome with the expansion, IMO. Good game but I'd always play Cyclades instead.
charlest's Avatar
charlest replied the topic: #232885 26 Aug 2016 16:37
New Mare Nostrum is great. Haven't used the expansion yet and 4 plays deep.
Space Ghost's Avatar
Space Ghost replied the topic: #232887 26 Aug 2016 17:08
I got the New Version of Mare Nostrum with Expansion, but it appears that the old mythology expansion wasn't completely ported over. Is that correct?

If so, I might be getting rid of the new version and hang onto my old version.
southernman's Avatar
southernman replied the topic: #232902 27 Aug 2016 06:38

Msample wrote: I'd say after reading Pete's comments, 2.5 stars is still generous. A lot of what he says resonates with me, and confirms my decision to skip this game.


Yeah, same here, reading everyone's highpoints (and lowpoints) of the game I'm happy that my decision not to get into this game was right - in fact as soon as I heard it compared with Eclipse (I hate that 'elegant' spreadsheet game) the rest of the discussion was pretty meaningless.
wadenels's Avatar
wadenels replied the topic: #232903 27 Aug 2016 07:38

Space Ghost wrote: I got the New Version of Mare Nostrum with Expansion, but it appears that the old mythology expansion wasn't completely ported over. Is that correct?

If so, I might be getting rid of the new version and hang onto my old version.


I haven't had a chance to play Mare Nostrum: Empires (new version) but my understanding is that the original + expansion is a bigger and longer game, while Empires has been steamlined a bit while still including some Mythology parts. The same spirit and core concepts but differences in implementation. Maybe similar to Descent 1st vs 2nd edition?
Chaz's Avatar
Chaz replied the topic: #232904 27 Aug 2016 08:12
So the main knock against Mansions of Madness is "you should go play an RPG instead"? Cool, except that doesn't work for everyone. My wife likes the storytelling, investigative, co-op aspect of MoM. We usually only get to play games with the two of us. Any game that requires a game master/bad guy player means that we're playing against each other, which she doesn't always love. Playing an actual RPG is right the hell out for all the reasons that I play board games instead. Hell, even the "you'll start to see the same effects multiple times" thing is pretty standard. How many times do you pull the same location card in Arkham or Eldritch Horror, or as the game master in Descent, send a bunch of beastmen at the squishy wizard turn after turn?

I'll grant you that all things being equal, there are definitely better ways to get the kind of thing that MoM is trying to go for. But for those of us without a regular game group that can just go play an RPG or something, MoM has a fair amount to recommend it.
Varys's Avatar
Varys replied the topic: #232908 27 Aug 2016 10:23

Southernman wrote:

Msample wrote: I'd say after reading Pete's comments, 2.5 stars is still generous. A lot of what he says resonates with me, and confirms my decision to skip this game.


Yeah, same here, reading everyone's highpoints (and lowpoints) of the game I'm happy that my decision not to get into this game was right - in fact as soon as I heard it compared with Eclipse (I hate that 'elegant' spreadsheet game) the rest of the discussion was pretty meaningless.


I've tried to play Eclipse and I can never get into it. Even the app puts me to sleep. Scythe, on the other hand, is quite enjoyable and easy for me to get into. I've also had no trouble teaching the game to others even people who seemed lukewarm about playing it beforehand. Everyone I've played with enjoyed it. They weren't always good at it, but they wanted to try it again. For me, that's a win.

I think you just have to try Scythe out once and see if it's for you. If you can find someone who has it, that would be best, but at the least, go watch a video play through. There are a few out already. I like the one by Jon Gets Games.
SuperflyPete's Avatar
SuperflyPete replied the topic: #232909 27 Aug 2016 10:29
You nailed it.

Either it's for you or not, but until you play it you won't know.
DukeofChutney's Avatar
DukeofChutney replied the topic: #232918 27 Aug 2016 17:10
Played the new Mansions of Madness today and I quite enjoyed it but I agree that there is really nothing under the hood. It think it ends up being slightly less ambitious that the original game which I sort of always wanted to love but found slow and a little dull in practice. This requires very little effort on my part and following the narrative is nice but it is essentially just exploring rooms followed by periodically throwing dice. To me it also feels like a game where the App really is the game rather than the physical components. X-com felt like a good marrage between the two, here FFG could have easily just put the pieces onto the APP map and scrapped all the minis and the board and just provided a card deck and character card at a quarter the price. Hot damn is this game expensive for what you get in the box. RRP on the 1st ed was like a full £30 quid cheaper. Despite all this I'd happily play it again and i guess there is a market for people who are allergic to playing actual rpgs.
Legomancer's Avatar
Legomancer replied the topic: #232926 28 Aug 2016 08:38

SuperflyTNT wrote: You nailed it.

Either it's for you or not, but until you play it you won't know.


I'm thinking it's not. If someone around me wants to play, I will, but I'm not seeking it out. If it turns out I would have liked it, that's ok. I'll survive.
R.P.Kraul's Avatar
R.P.Kraul replied the topic: #232935 28 Aug 2016 13:07
On Scythe, puzzly Euros are not my thing, but I've got to give them credit for nailing the presentation. Beautiful components that fit an unusual theme.

On Mansions 2ed, I was quite surprised by the game's simplicity. In fact, I would call it by far the simplest of the AHF games. So I do agree with Michael from that perspective. If you're familiar with AHF games, you may say, "This is it--move, search explore, roll some skill checks?" I do also agree that some of the mythos events are a little repetitive (and silly). There are scenario-specific events, and these are pretty cool, but the generic ones, I wish they'd snuffed them (given the way the app is designed, they could have). That said, I do love Mansions 2ed. Reason being, it tells a more cohesive story than the other AHF games (and the app is pretty innovative). But the simplicity does come with a cost, and for that reason, I still prefer AH. The two games don't really scratch the same each, but AH is just more satisfying. But Mansions will appeal more to casual gamers, and it should act a gateway to heavier games like AH & EH. I've only played Mansions solo, and it's a blast. I sense, however, that it won't work quite as well as a co-op game, and the reason is that, when you control only a single character, you just don't have a hell of a lot to do. I would rather play solo and coordinate the actions of three or four characters.
southernman's Avatar
southernman replied the topic: #232941 28 Aug 2016 16:13

Varys wrote:

Southernman wrote:

Msample wrote: I'd say after reading Pete's comments, 2.5 stars is still generous. A lot of what he says resonates with me, and confirms my decision to skip this game.


Yeah, same here, reading everyone's highpoints (and lowpoints) of the game I'm happy that my decision not to get into this game was right - in fact as soon as I heard it compared with Eclipse (I hate that 'elegant' spreadsheet game) the rest of the discussion was pretty meaningless.


I've tried to play Eclipse and I can never get into it. Even the app puts me to sleep. Scythe, on the other hand, is quite enjoyable and easy for me to get into. I've also had no trouble teaching the game to others even people who seemed lukewarm about playing it beforehand. Everyone I've played with enjoyed it. They weren't always good at it, but they wanted to try it again. For me, that's a win.

I think you just have to try Scythe out once and see if it's for you. If you can find someone who has it, that would be best, but at the least, go watch a video play through. There are a few out already. I like the one by Jon Gets Games.


Too many great games in my collection and so few people and opportunities to play them means I do not waste those valuable occasions on games I'm pretty sure I will not enjoy. I can understand the opinions and descriptions of Mike, Pete & Charie and from what I read it is not for me, just as reading Mike's review on Star Trek: Ascendancy convinced me it is probably my type of game and I should splash out of it.
southernman's Avatar
southernman replied the topic: #232942 28 Aug 2016 16:17

SuperflyTNT wrote: You nailed it.

Either it's for you or not, but until you play it you won't know.


Some of us (unfortunately) consider having opponents and opportunities to play games a luxury and therefore are extremely selective (and protective) of them.
Egg Shen's Avatar
Egg Shen replied the topic: #232944 28 Aug 2016 20:42

Chaz wrote: So the main knock against Mansions of Madness is "you should go play an RPG instead"? Cool, except that doesn't work for everyone. My wife likes the storytelling, investigative, co-op aspect of MoM. We usually only get to play games with the two of us. Any game that requires a game master/bad guy player means that we're playing against each other, which she doesn't always love. Playing an actual RPG is right the hell out for all the reasons that I play board games instead. Hell, even the "you'll start to see the same effects multiple times" thing is pretty standard. How many times do you pull the same location card in Arkham or Eldritch Horror, or as the game master in Descent, send a bunch of beastmen at the squishy wizard turn after turn?

I'll grant you that all things being equal, there are definitely better ways to get the kind of thing that MoM is trying to go for. But for those of us without a regular game group that can just go play an RPG or something, MoM has a fair amount to recommend it.


I've tried out MoM 2.0 with my wife and the next day she said, "I kept thinking about Mansions of Madness all day. I loved it." Over the years I've come to trust her opinion when it comes to Ameritrash as she has a nose for simple and fun games without any superfluous bullshit. To put it in perspective some of her favorites are DungeonQuest, Wiz-War, Betrayal at House on Hill, Fury of Dracula, Nexus Ops, and Buffy. She was ready to immediately add MoM 2.0 into her list of favorites.

While I'm not quite ready to heap that much praise on it, I've been pleasantly surprised and happy with the game. Though I will say that I'm in the opposite camp of R.P. Kraul...I think lots of fun and interaction is lost when soloing the game. Where I have no problem soloing Descent...Mansions gets better with more people at the table.


As for Scythe...that game more than anything else seems like the boardgame facsimile of pretentious Oscar bait bullshit. It seems tailor made for the type of people that think the only good movies to come out each year are the few movies deemed acceptable by the Academy. If you think boring garbage like The King's Speech and The Artist are life changing, wonderful movies...you'll probably adore Scythe. To me it looks about as exciting as boiled Tofu. The most beautifully presented Tofu you'll likely come across...but still boiled Tofu.
Matt Thrower's Avatar
Matt Thrower replied the topic: #232992 29 Aug 2016 15:13
I'm going to review MoM myself at some point, but here's the short version: it's unusual and great fun, but there are big question marks over replay value. Far bigger that there should be at that price point.
Gary Sax's Avatar
Gary Sax replied the topic: #232993 29 Aug 2016 15:18
Looking forward to reading your review.
Chaz's Avatar
Chaz replied the topic: #232994 29 Aug 2016 16:23
The replay value is a question I have too. On the one hand, FFG does like to sell you expansions. On the other, the app could make it easier (possible?) for them to release new content or additional variation at pretty low cost. It wouldn't be crazy for them to start selling new scenarios within the app for a few bucks a piece. Whether they'll do this or not, I dunno. And you're right, for the price, I'd like to see more variety in the box. But I guess we'll see.
Unicron's Avatar
Unicron replied the topic: #232995 29 Aug 2016 16:36
Scythe is duller than dogshit. Not to put too fine a point on it, but this isn't 4x at all. This game doesn't allow for player elimination or satisfying gains for being particularly combative. The costs, however, are staggering. Even Eclipse allows for extermination. I call bullshit. It's boiled tofu indeed.
Michael Barnes's Avatar
Michael Barnes replied the topic: #233005 29 Aug 2016 19:31
I _like_ how controversial Scythe has become. Much more interesting when opinions are sharply divided.

On this whole RPG issue that is emerging from the MoM discussion...here is where it fails as an RPG-like experience. It has none of that greasy, malleable, fleshy stuff that goes on between a living game master and the players. You get a prompt, you do what it says, and it gives you a result. And most of those times the result is - inexplicably - not even specific to the scenario. So it's like pulling from this RNG table like from an old Iron Crown RPG, but reading it straight out of the book. There is no embellishment, there is no customization on behalf of the GM to make the prompts or outcomes specific to the situation, party or character. It's so bland and soulless. Even with the "live" GM in the old MoM, there was more of that human stuff going on.

I don't know, I just feel like the app is giving you an RPG experience but without any of the actual stuff that makes RPGs great. It's like...well, I don't usually work blue but it's like a blow-up doll version of an RPG.

But I am with the counter-argument about RPGs- they take a lot of time, a lot of commitment, and a lot of effort not only on the behalf of the GM, but also the player group. It's doubtful I'll ever play an RPG seriously or regularly again, so I get the appeal of a game that offers at least some semblance of an RPG experience. But when I am able to step back from the game and see that all I am really doing is rolling skill checks and occasionally choosing between two to three different possible actions...and there isn't any of that human stuff in there...well, then what am I actually doing there?

Matt's comment about the price point is a whole different issue I didn't even touch. Considering a huge part of the game is on your phone, $100 is ridiculous for what is in the box. The miniatures are terrible, they have those HUGE bases that you- for whatever reason- stick an Arkham Horror-style chit in. And then that base covers the entire room. Why not just lop $50 off MSRP and do away with these god awful figures? Keep the player figures, but lose the rest.

On balance, Ghostbusters: Protect the Barrier is a vastly superior game.
DukeofChutney's Avatar
DukeofChutney replied the topic: #233014 29 Aug 2016 20:20
I concur on the price point, it's roughly £30 higher RRP than the 1st edition and it feels like there is a lot less (haven't done a side by side so I cannot be sure). THe very limited number of scenarios is rather inexcusable given the digital nature of the content.
Jarvis's Avatar
Jarvis replied the topic: #233020 29 Aug 2016 21:35
I agree about the price point. This game should have come with one or two more scenarios (say a short 1 star one and another med-long one). I'm not going to mind it if additional scenarios are provided at a free or hopefully cheap rate. If they expect people to pay $15-20 for a scenario like the print on demand ones, then I will be passing.

I do like the game as a simple RPG light game. Sometimes the effects are out of left field and I wish those were cut down slightly. But it's not really anything different than any of the Arkham games.