XCOM doesn't ship with a rule book?

I think it's a great idea for one game, and that's all this is. Will I buy it... no. But I'd love to try it out and I don't dismiss it out of hand simply because of this. One person may call it a gimmick and another an interesting experiment.

It's not like it's a big deal. A lot of people will find it interesting and as long as they know you need an app that's fine. Shipping with a CD would be a good idea but if they want to do it this way that's fine too. Some games require pencils, some a CD player, some a smartphone. I'm all for FFG trying to experiment a little bit and the idea that the intricacies of the rules are hidden from us is a good idea in theory. I mean in real life you have no clue what you rolled or why this encounter happened or where it came from... this is making sure that many of the rules are invisible to you and hoping that you experience greater immersion as a result.

If I was still buying games regularly I would certainly give this a shot. I'm all for any kind of experimentation in boardgame design and this is just another way to do that. If you don't have a smartphone that's fine... there's literally thousands of other games for you to enjoy.

No rule book? Wow... that's great. The more I think about it, the more interesting that is to me.

Did anybody here buy Atmosfear? You needed a VCR to play that game. I gave it a try at GenCon back in the early '90s. Glad that I didn't buy it, because I don't even own a working VCR anymore.

You guys who are crying obsolete technology do realize that there is a web browser based version of the app, right?

If you don't have a tablet (very plausible) or a smartphone (possible) I think you'd almost have to still have a PC connected to the internet. Unless you're a total technophobe, in which case why the heck would you even be interested in this game?

And I highly doubt that internet browsers are going to become obsolete. Now, the Unity Player it requires might no longer be supported at some point. But FFG is trying something different here. They may never do it again, but to complain that they didn't give you all the "stuff" you are used to having seems... well, it seems expected, really. We gamers don't like change.

It's a neat concept that blends a boardgame with a phone game. It's certainly not for everyone but to condemn it because it doesn't come with a full rulebook is silly. Especially since you know there will be some FAQ at some point, and they can update the app with any errata necessary.

Shellhead wrote: Did anybody here buy Atmosfear? You needed a VCR to play that game. I gave it a try at GenCon back in the early '90s. Glad that I didn't buy it, because I don't even own a working VCR anymore.

You don't need a VCR anymore.. the whole thing is on youtube (and many other places)



it's not a big deal. And eh... if the game can't be played one day in the future... who cares? It's just an experiment.

I can't think of any board game ever that intentionally hides the rules from us (except maybe Eine gegen Eine, which sounded interesting for one play) and really.. the rules are generally just clutter that take you out of the experience anyway. Adding numbers and spread sheets to shit doesn't do anything but obscure the intention of the game.. this removes a layer of abstraction and why not try it at least once?

1) As I have previously opined this is a computer game with a board not a board game with a computer. It should come as no surprise that they have taken the computer game model of not including a rule book. A development I also despise. That being said, if I want to play X-com on/with a computer, I'll just play X-com on the damn computer.

2) I also really hate the perceived need or desirability of merging board games with electronic technology. A big part of board gaming's appeal is that batteries are not required. Anywhere, anytime, I have everything I need in the box. I continue to think of it as a gimmick.

3) I think this game is not targeted at board game hobbyists. I think it is clearly an attempt to get video gamers interested in board games. To expand the customer base. Not such a bad idea. Will it succeed in that level? I don't know but neither do I care. I have zero interest in this game.

repoman wrote: 3) I think this game is not targeted at board game hobbyists. I think it is clearly an attempt to get video gamers interested in board games. To expand the customer base. Not such a bad idea. Will it succeed in that level? I don't know but neither do I care. I have zero interest in this game.

This is an excellent point. Look at the license. It's trying to draw in some PC gamers who might also like a board game now and then. Maybe some Star Wars fans find out about FFG because of this game, and then bam, they're buying X Wing and/or Imperial Assault. Barnes' example of in-game tutorials in video games is true too, but the market has spoken. People like having a tutorial more than having to read stuff. There's a reason that Rodney's Watch it Played series is pretty popular, and two thirds of most video reviews is dedicated to staring out of focus at a board with some guy waving his hands around.

Most board gamers don't even like reading rulebooks. Multiple times at meet-ups, I've taught people games that they own but they hadn't played yet. Try to find a M:tG rulebook. The things that come in those fat packs don't cut it and are mostly there to hype the set. You have to go online to find the rules, and then it's an enormous document that takes everything into account. With most new board games, there's one person teaching and 3-4 learning who will likely never read the rulebook, and will go on playing the game happily. (Or play it once and forget about it, but that's another subject entirely). The kinds of people who frequent a site like this are becoming a minority.

I mentioned elsewhere that I played Advanced Civilization for the first time this last weekend and loved it. I read the whole rulebook online the night before because someone put a pdf up at BGG. I'm already lamenting that I'll likely not ever play this game with my normal friends and family. I'm turning 30 this year but I already feel like an old man.

For what it's worth, I loved the recent XCOM PC games, but I never played the original because we had a Mac. I'm not going to spend 80 bucks on this, but I'll play it at some point if I get a chance.

Jexik wrote: I'm turning 30 this year but I already feel like an old man.

Really? I'm turning 55 and I feel like a young man, so you must be well fucked up.

I can't help myself.. defending this game is fun for me and forces me to think about boardgames in a way I don't do normally... Plus everyone seems to hate it so I feel obligated in some strange way.. think of as for the sake of the thread.

repoman wrote: 1) As I have previously opined this is a computer game with a board not a board game with a computer. It should come as no surprise that they have taken the computer game model of not including a rule book. A development I also despise. That being said, if I want to play X-com on/with a computer, I'll just play X-com on the damn computer.

2) I also really hate the perceived need or desirability of merging board games with electronic technology. A big part of board gaming's appeal is that batteries are not required. Anywhere, anytime, I have everything I need in the box. I continue to think of it as a gimmick.

3) I think this game is not targeted at board game hobbyists. I think it is clearly an attempt to get video gamers interested in board games. To expand the customer base. Not such a bad idea. Will it succeed in that level? I don't know but neither do I care. I have zero interest in this game.

1/ Bah.. it's a hybrid.. which it's weighted more heavily towards is a matter of opinion after having played it. But it certainly seems to be more boardgame from all I've read. Certainly more tactile at the least.

2/ I don't see any need to merge them... there was what.. two games at gencon that did it? That's not very many it seems to be there is no need at all... everyone here seems to hate the idea in fact (out of hand even). Which would lead me to the opposite conclusion. In any case who cares? A game is a game if it's good great, if it's not, forget about it. All I would care about is that it's good. I'm not going to be turned on or off by a little thing like an app.

3/ Totally wrong according to everything I've read thus far. Apparently it is not aimed at casuals or newbies at all. From what I can tell most reviews warn you off of thinking that way... mind you I've only read reviews from people I don't know that weren't that well written so who's to say. But it certainly doesn't sound like this at all.

I find the general vitriol for this idea.. this experiment, slightly hilarious. It's strange how few people mention that it being good is all that matters. Most are just opposed to it on principle.

Lastly, Thirsty.... 55 is old, your feelings are wrong. I'm only 41 and I know that... you should know better.

repoman wrote: 1) As I have previously opined this is a computer game with a board not a board game with a computer.

Have you actually played it or not? Because you're wrong... It felt *very* much like a boardgame to me, and happens to nicely integrate the technology that we have available, ya know, being 2015 and all.

Any game that requires a computer to play it, is to my way of thinking, a computer game.

Don't really care if it is 2015 or 2215. I don't feel the need to integrate technology into certain things. Board games is one of these.

Anyone remember quest of the rings?

http://youtu.be/maBfOZQ2Cbs

Holy crap guys, so much hate over the fear of obsolescence? It has a web app (which was already mentioned) that I have no doubt could be kept running for decades. Go look at the games from the 80s you can still play because the community keeps them alive. Fuck Space Alert because some day I'm not going to have a CD player anymore...wait, they have it in mp3 format? And if you want to claim it's a video game, at least everyone gets to sit in the same room to play without having to drag their PCs over for a LAN party.

How many IOS board games do the people here play that they claim are better than playing the real thing? Fucking hypocritical. I personally think this concept is awesome. The app can handle the fiddly bits while still allowing people to gather around a board and roll dice and fiddle with miniatures. They probably could have designed the same game with sand timers and a card-driven AI, but this sounds a hell of a lot more fun to play.

I get the game delivered on Monday and might just get a play in that night. It might suck, but I'll bet I'll still enjoy it. The game itself may not have staying power, as very few do, but I doubt it will be because of the app. While I don't want all board games to go down this road, I would love to see what else people could come up with.

As to the original topic, I would have preferred a real rule book, but I will wait to pass judgement until I play it.

I lost the CD's for Space Alert so now I have to use the app to play it.. that's ok though, the app is better than the CD anyway and I still have the audio files on my computer too. It's always been my favorite co-op boardgame videogame.

Funny how little fuss I heard over that one.

We might as well start freaking out over Omega Virus, Dark Tower, and Stop Thief while we're at it.

If it turns out that the game is an all-time classic and you don't want to mess with the web app, make planned obsolescence work for you. Instead of recycling your old phone take out the battery and throw it, the phone, and an AC adapter in the box with the app pre-loaded. Easy.

I'd never buy this game but someone in my group - after spotting it at our FLGS - plans to buy it and bring it to our next game night. Strangely enough, I'm most interested in seeing how the X-COM funding side of the game is handled since I'm already familiar with the co-op whack-a-mole concept.

Omega Virus, Dark Tower, etc were self-contained.