Interesting detail by CP on TOS

Also, if you want a more serious answer from me, I've never fully bought into the "critically" and "seriously" aspects of boardgame discussion. Are there some things of interest that could be drawn into bigger pictures? Yes. On every single game? No.

You want Art-House examples? That'd be Nate with Cave Evil and Mushroom Eaters. The Polish historical group that put together Kolitchka (I'm butchering the spelling). That lady that made the game about stuffing Jews into boxcars that is in some museum somewhere whose name I'm took lazy to look up.

And perhaps art-house was the wrong term...Boutique I think would be more applicable. Basically it sounds like you're upset that FFG is now closer to Hasbro than Nate with Cave Evil (what is their company name by the way?).

It seems to me that a lot of FFG's non-LCG successes as of late are either reprints, expansions, derivatives, or reusing mechanics from games they released 5+ years ago. A lot of the really cool stuff from Warrior Knights, Starcraft, and Warcraft (three of my favorite FFG games) is still the cool stuff in their newer in-house originals, but ever so slightly modified.

It's the same issue I have with a lot of modern Euros, where it's the same game you already played but now it has a rondel or now you're shipping from Italy instead of to Italy. I can't comment much on their LCGs because I don't play them, but outside of the LCGs it doesn't feel like they're pushing the envelope they way it felt when I played the aforementioned 3 for the first time. Android is probably their most recent "bold" design.

Is it FFG's fault that derivative sells?

And how many "breakthroughs" do you expect in a year? And isn't it a bit unreasonable to expect them all from one company? Also, how many actual In-House designers do they have full time? 3?

wolvendancer wrote:

wice wrote:

wolvendancer wrote: At least all Wice said was, 'That's just like, your opinion, man.' which while obvious and unhelpful is the truth.

Actually, what I meant to say (but couldn't be bothered to spell it out) was "You worded your 'criticism' of FFG as undeniable fact, when in reality it's just that you happen not to like their games". For fuck's sake, you started three of your paragraphs with "we certainly can't love FFG for".

Allow me to introduce you to the 'editorial we':

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nosism

There, you learned something today. It's good to learn things, isn't it?

Oh, you can use Wikipedia? That's cute, but we (as in: you and me) both know that you used "we" as if you were talking for everybody. Anyway, I don't really give a shit about whether you like FFG or not, you wrote a bunch of nonsense, I corrected you on all points, then you tried to use condescension and failed miserably. Let's leave it at that, shall we?

VonTush wrote: Is it FFG's fault that derivative sells?

And how many "breakthroughs" do you expect in a year? And isn't it a bit unreasonable to expect them all from one company? Also, how many actual In-House designers do they have full time? 3?

It's not their fault for trying to run an successful business. I'm just less excited by it is all I'm saying. FWIW I think Rune Age is one of the top 3 deckbuilders out right now, and it's absolutely derivative. I like their BattleLore changes too. Daybreak expansion is great! Even with all that it just seems to me that some of the excitement is gone. Could be I'm just more jaded.

my main hope was for a Twilight Imperium 4th ed in a box seize that i could actually transport, alas Christian doesn't seem to share my enthusiasm for such a game.

I'm not against FFG, i think they are a great company, but they haven't announced any games i'm really interest in in a while. I think like Wadnels thats a legitimate comment.

And I won't tell you that you should be excited for a game!

FFG for me right now is hitting this stride blending flavor, character, depth and most importantly playability that just resonates with me. I've never been more excited for FFG titles than I am right now because these more so than Android, StarCraft, TI3 don't feel like I need to re-learn and re-teach the game every time I pull one off the shelf.

For me they had good designs, now I feel like they're putting out good games.

i prefer their rules lighter games. Chaos in the Old World and Blood Bowl TM are probably my favourite games by them. My issue is more theme and art. Im not massively into GW franchises, so i'll pass on diskwars, but i really dislike Terranoth and for some reason Star Wars whilst i like it doesn't rock my world in games.

The AGOT 4 player Feast of Crows expansion is a massive improvement on the 'design' of AGOT. Its a shame they didn't come up with the system in time for 2nd ed.

In all honesty I do like FFG. They are the easy target because they are the biggest hobby game manufacturer... but they're still a "hobby" game company and not a Hasbro or even GW. Although I think they'd like to be.

The coffin box games were great but honestly you aren't going to sell me too many of those, it's quite a commitment and I don't need more than a small handful of event games in my home. No one does. There's just no time. It was a wise move to drop them from the roster. Although my ToI box is absolutely stuffed full of stuff so in that case the size does make sense... for me.

As for their newer games... I don't see how they are any worse than their older games really. Or how they're any less original. All of their games, like every company out there, are signs of the times. The community influences one another. That's how it's always been. Their original games are all "derivative" if you want to go there. But you can make that argument for almost any game you want. All that matters is if it's good. I'm not interested in who was first, I'm interested in who was best.

The really odd thing Wolvendancer said was that FFG was responsible for this DLC model that's being introduced into boardgames as of late... I don't buy that. First, GW did it way before them and for that matter so did WotC or even TSR... and that's the short list. That has been going on for ages and will continue. It's just a solid business model. Lifestyle games are all about that mentality. Mini's especially.

If FFG is a bad company I'd like to see someone talk about a better company, rather than shit on one company, champion a great one you like and let's see where that goes because even though I'm not interested in the majority of games FFG produces and I buy from lots of different companies besides just them, I still think they are a market leader and are seen that way by the majority of gamers.

Attacking a company is easier than championing one. We naturally look for flaws and ways to criticize, we have to remind ourselves to look for beauty.

Actually I love the way FFG revamps their games.

When I got into this hobby, FFG was in the middle of the big box crazes. Lots of them got me interested at the beginning, but then I read the rulebook and found them lacking or excessive.

Descent 2nd Edition is now my champion of AT virtue.