Life, Death, and MICRO GAMES

The games you've played thread has been sidetracked for two or three pages talking about micro games, so move it over here.

Do you like them/dislike them/have no feelings toward them?

have no feelings toward them.

I actively dislike long games tho...

My main contribution was Love Letter is a good game and was an big hit with a wide variety of players. Much like after Dominion was released, folks saw this and it looked pretty simple and said "Hey! I can make a game like that!", and attempted, but mostly missed the mark across the board.

Also an interesting note, the phrase "micro game" in the post-Love Letter world was popularised by kickstarter companies like Tasty Minstrel and Crash as a way to market their games as being in line with Love Letter.

Long games are my staple. "Micro" games in the context mentioned for me are either games we play waiting for everyone to arrive, or games to end the night to shoot the shit before everyone leaves.

But there is no way I can fill a night playing nothing but a bunch of little games.

As a concept, my only objection to a micro-game would be that I would rather use the time engaging my friends and acquaintances in conversation instead of frantically cramming a small game into that time interval. But I do like the idea of a cheap game that is quick to set up and take down, easy to teach, and easy to play.

In actual experience, I find these light filler games to be shallow, uninteresting time-wasters. As I posted in the other thread, both games of Love Letter that I played ended early and were already outlasting the interest level of the players at that point. The choice of playing one of two cards is very limiting, especially if they are the same card, and the general absence of information about the tactical or strategic position of opponents makes the choice of a card target so empty.

For a more reasonable contrast than extreme cases like Magic Realm or ASL, consider Death Angel. It is about twice as expensive as a micro-game, and takes about twice as long to play. And yet somehow Death Angel confronts players with a strongly-implemented theme, a story, tough tactical decisions, and a surprising amount of replay value. I don't think that Death Angel is merely twice as good a game as Love Letter, I think that Death Angel is several orders of magnitude better.

It's a dumb term, and there were already dumb terms to cover it.

I like the idea of a micro game. The minimalist-ness of them appeals to me more than 18 different mechanics competing for balance in a 5-hour game. I like the idea of a long game. The epic-ness of them appeals to me more than cramming 18 different games into a 5-hour window.

Sometimes you feel like a nut; sometimes you don't.

Shellhead wrote: For a more reasonable contrast than extreme cases like Magic Realm or ASL, consider Death Angel. It is about twice as expensive as a micro-game, and takes about twice as long to play. And yet somehow Death Angel confronts players with a strongly-implemented theme, a story, tough tactical decisions, and a surprising amount of replay value. I don't think that Death Angel is merely twice as good a game as Love Letter, I think that Death Angel is several orders of magnitude better.

I love Death Angel, but not as a cooperative experience. You choose 1 card a turn, like Love Letter, but it takes twice as long and you have about 1000% more downtime.

As a solo game Death Angel is ages better than Love Letter (as not a solo game). With that being said, I like Love Letter for what it is, and Lost Legacy is pretty good too.

When does a game cease to be a Microgame and move into Filler range? Or past Filler into just Game?

Hive is a game I've never heard called Filler and for sure not a Micro, but it has 22 pieces and a short and direct ruleset.

Is a Microgame what you use as filler for a night of playing Fillers?

My reply got swallowed

microgrames didnt used to be about game length, right? It used to be about Victory Point Games style production, quasi PnP, small number of small components etc. Games Workshop etc?

I'd say filler is something utterly pointless designed for twits who must fill every millisecond of a nominated game night with something thats kind of game related. Avoid.
It becomes a "game" when it's worth playing on its own merit and not to "pass the time" while Pete turns up late because he's been beating off sniffing his dice cup collection kitted out in his Stone Age furry underpant range

obligatory;




I quite like Love Letter for what it is. Its a game I play when people want to play something but don't have time for something more. It is just card counting and some guess work, but that's entertaining. I don't really use games like this to ensure that every moment of a games eve is filled with some sort of game, but when you are in the mood for a game of some sort it does give you something to do in short periods of time. To me, love letter has a similar amount of depth to something like knock out wrist. Mentally i bracket it in with deck card games, but it happens to be easier to teach, requires less shuffling and dealing, and possibly shorter.

Really Microgame is just a re-branding of the word filler as far as i can tell. I'm not sure what other games I have played that would be called Microgames by the hipsters. I've played Coop, does that count? Short bluff games are not really anything new though.

ldsdbomber wrote: It becomes a "game" when it's worth playing on its own merit and not to "pass the time" while Pete turns up late because he's been beating off sniffing his dice cup collection kitted out in his Stone Age furry underpant range

Love Letter, One Night Ultimate Werewolf, and Lost Legacy are totally worth playing on their own merits, but we still mostly play Love Letter and Lost Legacy when waiting for someone to show up/waiting for a game to end.

If we were playing a game no one enjoyed/wanted to play, your argument would be valid, but really if you're playing a game that's enjoyed by the group, who cares what the reason they're playing it is?

Hive is an Abstract which places it out of the Microgame category, probably because it only plays 2 and is seen as thinky because it's an abstract.

Bull Nakano wrote:

ldsdbomber wrote: It becomes a "game" when it's worth playing on its own merit and not to "pass the time" while Pete turns up late because he's been beating off sniffing his dice cup collection kitted out in his Stone Age furry underpant range

Love Letter, One Night Ultimate Werewolf, and Lost Legacy are totally worth playing on their own merits, but we still mostly play Love Letter and Lost Legacy when waiting for someone to show up/waiting for a game to end.

If we were playing a game no one enjoyed/wanted to play, your argument would be valid, but really if you're playing a game that's enjoyed by the group, who cares what the reason they're playing it is?

exactly, it's cool if you like Love Letter. I don't, so am not sure how my argument isnt valid, it was more an opinion, man

But how many other people organize a game night specifically to play Love Letter? I'd struggle to believe it was many.