Front Page

Content

Authors

Game Index

Forums

Site Tools

Submissions

About

KK
Kevin Klemme
March 09, 2020
35142 2
Hot
KK
Kevin Klemme
January 27, 2020
20819 0
Hot
KK
Kevin Klemme
August 12, 2019
7405 0
Hot
O
oliverkinne
December 19, 2023
3967 0
Hot
O
oliverkinne
December 14, 2023
3495 0
Hot

Mycelia Board Game Review

Board Game Reviews
O
oliverkinne
December 12, 2023
2075 0
O
oliverkinne
December 07, 2023
2583 0

River Wild Board Game Review

Board Game Reviews
O
oliverkinne
December 05, 2023
2252 0
O
oliverkinne
November 30, 2023
2495 0
J
Jackwraith
November 29, 2023
3014 0
Hot
O
oliverkinne
November 28, 2023
1971 0
S
Spitfireixa
October 24, 2023
3692 0
Hot
O
oliverkinne
October 17, 2023
2619 0
O
oliverkinne
October 10, 2023
2461 0
O
oliverkinne
October 09, 2023
2289 0
O
oliverkinne
October 06, 2023
2505 0

Outback Crossing Review

Board Game Reviews
×
Bugs: Recent Topics Paging, Uploading Images & Preview (11 Dec 2020)

Recent Topics paging, uploading images and preview bugs require a patch which has not yet been released.

× Talk about the latest and greatest AT, and the Classics.

Are You Good at Buying Games?

More
03 May 2017 09:04 #247644 by Legomancer
Last year I was putting in an order for a sale copy of Pandemic Legacy and, to round out the shipping, I threw in Terraforming Mars, which looked neat and has a setting that interests me. When TM came in, I read the rules and taught it at our next session.

Everyone loved it.

From that point on, during the months of October and November, we played it constantly. We knew we stood a chance of burning out on it, but never seemed to. Every time it was suggested, everyone was down for it. Every single person I taught it to liked it, often by round three. By December I was purposely not bringing it to game days because it needed a little rest, but was still happy to play it. In my group, where we are often content to let other folks own something, there are now five copies floating around. One guy, who is usually a very big cult of the new dude has played it over 20 times without actually owning a copy (he has one now).

I can't tell you the last time this happened, and how great it feels. TM does absolutely nothing new. But it gets everything just so right, and the game is designed that each play unfolds differently, even if you're playing the same corporation you've played before.

It's been so long since we found an actual gem, a game we all love, that we all enjoy playing, and love revisiting and exploring. It's such a great experience after being stuck on the churn train for so long.

The other night, when I was playing Great Western Trail, the group at the other table finished what they were doing and broke out TM. They were enjoying it while we kind of muddled through GWT. And it got me thinking about what wasn't happening in GWT. We weren't playing it, we were just figuring it out. (Granted, it was new to all four of us.) Occasionally we'd get riled up against each other, but it was because of another trend in gaming: the opposition in the game is caused by the game design, where there's only one foozle so you have to be the first to get the foozle or miss out on getting a foozle. And everyone needs one, so it's not like you can roll with the no-foozle strategy. That guy took it and prevented you from getting it because there's no reason not to get one.

GWT doesn't present you with a raft of options; you're pretty limited in your goals. Instead it makes you race to achieve them. The decision seems to be that you need to do X and Y, and which should you do first before someone else does it. In TM you usually have a whole bunch of options, and it's a matter of whether or not you stick to your strategy or take a detour that might pay out. They probably play out the same to someone who's completely done with euro games, but it was a huge difference to me. In one play I felt like I'd seen everything GWT had to offer, now it was just a case of optimizing it. I still get into new situations with TM.

Sturgeon's Law says that 90% of everything is crap. Unfortunately for nerds, this has turned into a glorification of crap. It's okay for something to be garbage because 90% of everything is garbage. Ergo, we gotta have garbage. Instead of aiming for that 10% it's an excuse to just muck about in the 90%. This is also part of what drives the "collectors": why have 100 great games on your shelf when you can have 3000 of anything, and it's okay if a bunch of those 3000 are garbage because hey, Sturgeon's Law permits it. How many people do you know "enjoy" bad movies because it's easier to do than actually developing some taste and trying to find out what movies are worth seeing?

I've strayed from my topic here, I think, but my point is that when you live for the churn, when you reward the churn, then you get the churn. You get publishers who are happy to throw whatever into the churn and designers who are happy to design for the churn. Let me make one more side note: I used to be a Portal fanboy. Games like Neuroshima Hex, Theseus, and the New Era were gloriously weird and interesting designs, and I knew I could count on Portal to deliver something interesting. They've done too many clunkers now, and I don't give them the attention that I used to. I don't blame them. They're trying to swim in the big pool now and the big pool doesn't let you just put out two or weirdo titles a year; you gotta feed the grind. Even KS, which used to be a big home for unique titles is now just part of the churn.

I don't have time or energy to sift through a wall of games to find the diamond, assuming there's a diamond in there. And I certainly don't want to find diamonds just to put them on a shelf and then keep looking for more diamonds. If getting off the train means I "miss out" on something great, I'll happily miss out. I have plenty of games and will live. The Terraforming Mars experience taught me not that the grind pays off from time to time, but that it paid off so rarely. IT's not worth it.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
03 May 2017 10:16 #247667 by Msample

Michael Barnes wrote: .but even good ones like Scythe just fade in the churn.


SCYTHE was probably one of the biggest let down games I've played in recent memory. Looks cool, duller than dirt to actually play with random movement restrictions thrown in just because . Looks AT, in reality is a resource gathering game. See ya....

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
03 May 2017 10:27 #247669 by Jexik
Replied by Jexik on topic Are You Good at Buying Games?

Shellhead wrote: Do you always play a game before you buy it?

Probably 90% of the time now. Some games like Nexus Ops and Dominion had such a preponderance of positive talk from voices I could trust that I went for it.

Do you kickstart games?

Very rarely. I think it has only been expansions to games that I've already played... or the one time I backed Puzzle Strike after I read a dozen of Sirlin's indoctrinating texts. I wasn't disappointed.

Do you read reviews or go by instinct?

I don't read too many reviews, but when i did... I probably mostly read them after I purchased the game, or otherwise made up my mind in the positive to reaffirm my belief. It's awful but true. I stay away from BGG now, and find that I buy far fewer games.

How often do you sell games?

Not very. I try to only purchase games I anticipate will be forever-shelfers. Most of the games that are relatively unplayed were well-meaning gifts. I sold a bunch of 'scape, but otherwise I'm open to letting friends borrow games or giving them away.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
03 May 2017 10:35 #247671 by Shellhead
My recent (years) acquisitions are listed below. The good ones are getting played, and people enjoy playing them. The bad ones are already gathering dust. The unknowns haven't hit the table yet.

Good:
1. Silver Tower
2. Zimby Mojo
3. Psycho Raiders
4. Camp Grizzly
5. Sons of Anarchy

Bad:
1. Firefly: couldn't resist the $28 price at Barnes & Noble, but I already know that it is long and low on interaction.
2. Secret Hitler: doesn't generate enough interaction to be fun. Could still be good with the right group.

Unknown:
1. The Saltlands: it looks very good, and I have always wanted a Mad Max kind of game, but I am still reading through the rules.
2. The Quiet Year: I want to make my own card deck, because the existing reference list in the rules is too spoilerish. I suspect that this game needs the right kind of players to succeed, so I am looking for the right occasion to bring it out.

I regret none of these acquisitions. I just need to do more gaming to get them on the table.

A few that I passed on after careful consideration:

1. Cthulhu Wars: I agonized over that kickstarter. It looked too good to be true, and I was thinking about dropping the $300+ on the base game and some of the expansions just as my employer was going out of business. Even though I am finally gainfully employed again and making more money than ever, I still flinch at the retail price of just the base game.
2. the new Buffy the Vampire Slayer game: I liked the show and enjoyed the old Buffy boardgame, and this new one looked cool. But reviews made it sound like a super-lite Arkham lite, so I passed.
3. Star Trek Ascendancy: strong reviews here, but I was seeing a thematic mismatch in terms of the scale of the game. And three-player games are hard to do right.
4. Star Wars Rebellion: I still own my old school Freedom in the Galaxy, and I have been hoping for a long time that FFG or somebody would give it the same kind of makeover that FitG's sister War of the Ring got. But I got the impression that the new rules weren't very streamlined, and that combat lacked fun.
5. Risk: Legacy: I want this game, but I know that I don't have a reliable group for it.

If I played board games a lot more often, I might still be open to buying these game, except for the new Buffy.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Jexik

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
03 May 2017 10:51 #247674 by Msample

Shellhead wrote: 4. Star Wars Rebellion: I still own my old school Freedom in the Galaxy, and I have been hoping for a long time that FFG or somebody would give it the same kind of makeover that FitG's sister War of the Ring got. But I got the impression that the new rules weren't very streamlined, and that combat lacked fun.
.


Other than combat, the rest of the rules are pretty tight IMO, esp for an FFG game. Playing time is in the 2-3 hour range, which is pretty good for a game its size these days.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Gary Sax, Frohike

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
03 May 2017 11:04 #247679 by charlest
Agreed. It's actually relatively streamlined and simple. You can pick it up months after playing with just a little rules refresher.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
03 May 2017 11:14 #247680 by Michael Barnes
We weren't playing it, we were just figuring it out.

This is pretty significant right here.

It strikes me that many game players, especially the Churners (TM), prefer this stage of game discovery than the long term revelation of variety or depth. The frisson is in trying to "solve" the problem of coming into a new game and working out how to win or at least perform well in it. Once the honeymoon or break-in period ends...there is something else that they are entering that stage with.

I know a few people that are SPECIFICALLY like this. But I've never really put it into words like Dave has there.

This has a negative effect on games like Cosmic, for example, which offer a lot of built-in variety and volatility. Because you may not play the best example of a session in the first five games. The sixth might be the best you've ever played and the seventh may be kind of shitty. But you won't know that if you have moved on to "figure out" the new game that came in this week.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Gary Sax, stormseeker75, san il defanso, Jexik, Frohike, xthexlo

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
03 May 2017 12:35 #247700 by hotseatgames
Agreed. Once a game gets played enough so that everyone knows the cards / the capabilities of all of the factions, etc., THEN it starts to get really good. When my group plays Spartacus, we go all in, and it is glorious.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Jexik

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
03 May 2017 13:06 #247703 by Gary Sax
Exactly. It's why I still play Twilight Struggle with my friend. There's no discovery left. We know the cards. Then the real game begins.

I can't imagine playing as many games as the euro folks on BGG play, if I did that with wargames and AT I'd never have a good time with a game. I already churn through too many games and I'm not even that bad. Luckily my game partners don't like playing new games because they don't enjoy the process (hobby?) of learning new games.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Jexik, Frohike, xthexlo

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
03 May 2017 13:39 - 03 May 2017 13:51 #247706 by san il defanso
I think a lot of people only view complexity as something mechanical, rather than something social. I think that was part of the response to Bemused this past weekend, and I've seen it over and over again with games like Cosmic Encounter, Dune, and Battlestar Galactica. There's a certain subset of people who kind of grudgingly enjoy those games, while giving the backhanded compliment that it's the "experience" that makes it good. I think the assumption is that the above-the-table game is happening in spite of the game, not because the game has created a structure where interaction can really flourish.

A lot of people are really uncomfortable in that space, and I understand it. It requires a different set of tools that some people just aren't into. But it drives me crazy when it's viewed as some kind of lazy design, as if the designer is trying to get away with too few mechanics.

Board gaming has the potential to be one of the most human pursuits out there, and I'm continually amazed how many people seem satisfied to cut that aspect out of the hobby.
Last edit: 03 May 2017 13:51 by san il defanso.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Shellhead, Cranberries, Frohike, Colorcrayons, xthexlo

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
03 May 2017 13:40 #247708 by xthexlo
First, thank you all! I cannot express how much I value these conversations. The honesty coupled with the passion and knowledge everyone brings to the table is enlivening -- I often feel like I'm back with my old (ancient) D&D crew, arguing about things like the "letter of a rule" versus the "spirit of a rule." So, thanks everyone!

Second, I personally value unfolding substance and increasing depth in a game. First play? Rough. Second play? Smoother with more rules comprehension, but mostly okay. Third play? This is where the fun begins! This, for me, is the point where one actually starts playing *the game* itself. And if subsequent plays reveal new strategies and deeper content, the all the better!

To be honest, this is where I struggle as a designer. I create my games with the assumption that players will engage with them several times to discover the real meat below the surface. This has proven to be more the exception than the rule. (I've even had one persin make a formal review without ever playing the game at all!) Don't got me wrong, I'd love a commercial success! I just don't want to give up the soul of the game to get it. I feel that this "Cult of the New" seems to encourage: compile a collection of mechanisms, toss in some pretty minis and cardboard chunks, slather on some nice artwork and a passable theme, then throw it over the fence to people with money -- it's sales that matter, after all, not immersion... That, to my mind anyway, is a Frankenstein model: it creates a body without a soul. And perhaps worse... it deadens the tastebuds of new gamers so that they cannot even recognize a wonderful new flavor of game when it actually comes along.

In the end, for better or for worse, I'll keep doing what I do as my little hobby: designing games that I like playing and trying to share them with like-minded gamers.

Thanks for listening! Er... reading.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Shellhead, Gary Sax, Dr. Mabuse, Cranberries, san il defanso, hotseatgames, Frohike, wadenels

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
03 May 2017 15:05 #247719 by Stonecutter

Gary Sax wrote: The old thing hits home.

For some reason, I've been thinking a lot about my GMT games lately. Need to get reliable partners for them. Here I Stand, need to try Virgin Queen again, Comancheria, Fields of Fire, my FAB wargames... for some reason I'm fired up about them. May need to recommit to VASSAL once I move, hopefully live. Need to get back into MMP's great campaigns of the civil war too. It's weird because I went through a bunch of years of not playing a ton of them, it's how I really got into the hobby.


If you ever want to get F:AT Here I Stand going on Vassal again, I'd be up for it. Or maybe there's a tabletop simulator version now that would make it easier?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
03 May 2017 18:33 #247738 by wadenels
I've owned way too many games. I've gotten rid of more than I currently own, and I want to get rid of some more. I still have a massive collection. I keep track at BGG if you're interested in the numbers.

Why so many games?

Because I like to try things out. I'd buy a game having not played it if it looks cool enough. I especially like to hunt down old games because they tended to be bolder in their attempts to break new ground in the board game design space, although a great many of them are actually worse for doing so. A few years ago I would have said I was good at buying games because I was buying a lot of new experiences and enjoying them.

Now I'm buying almost nothing because I've realized I have more games on the shelf than I could probably ever play enough to master. I've been dialing back the amount of board game news and reviews I consume because I find that doesn't actually help me enjoy the hobby, it just helps me find more things to buy. But the games I have now have survived multiple sell-offs and the games I have now are ones that I would rather play more than some new thing that's extremely similar to the other new thing. Lego's Sturgeon's Law comment is right on the money, and it wasn't until this past year I started thinking that my shelf has been shifting towards the 10% and away from the crap. I'm finding that I can still have new experiences with games I've played many times before, and those experiences are more rewarding than trying some clever new auction game or deckbuilder or Risk derivative. So now I think that a few years ago I was shit at buying board games, but I'm good at it now.

We'll see what I think about it a few years from now.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Nodens, xthexlo

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
04 May 2017 23:29 #247845 by Cranberries
I just picked up this for $2.00 at the Deseret Industries thrift store in Orem So I'm going to say that on this night, at least, I was good at buying games.




Also Earth Reborn arrived via trade in the mail. So a good day for good games.
Attachments:
The following user(s) said Thank You: Frohike, Nodens

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
05 May 2017 08:30 #247856 by Nodens
When my whole collection was in an attic thousands of miles away and the second print run of TI3 became available in Europe, I bought my first game in five years. Next I had to build a group, of course.
It all went downhill from there. There are hundreds of people like me who discovered TOS, got carried away and suddenly had to have a game for when they are on a boat with their mother-in-law and two midgets, one of whom is a recovering alcoholic. Going to Essen was the worst, because gotta make it worth the trip, amirite. Last year I was finally able to stop that, in a way, and just gave a third of my games to a school. Had two P500 Games arriving in fall, but that was all. And now this thread has me looking at ebay again. There's a copy of Blood Royale, a game I have been salivating on as far back as 1989. Will never get my group to play through this. I really want to try Witness, readily available over here. Damn you guys.
Do you usually buy games that you enjoy? What I can say is that everyone tends to like what they bought, even if it's a game. I almost never get to try before buying any more, but I know really well what I want now, so there's been only one disappointment.
What is your methodology for buying games? Will I possibly prefer playing this to my favourite game? Is it still intriguing after four weeks? If yes to both, I might consider buying.
Do you automatically buy or not buy based on certain criteria, like games by certain designers or games with minis? Absolutely. One is: don't make me paint stuff. Also: no need for Euros. This is Germany, there are Euros in every house I've been to. Every person I know has played Catan. If it's by a Bruno or Ludovic, I will take a closer look. Those tend to be nasty.
Do you kickstart games? Never. I'd rather buy something that has been thoroughly playtested.
Do you read reviews or go by instinct? I just like reading reviews. Mostly here and Shut Up and Sit Down for entertainment. The only reviewer always in line with my own taste was Matt Drake, I really miss his stuff.
How often do you sell games? Not anymore. Had some bad experiences with some pretty anal people. Games are made to be played. Expect wear. I just give them away, preferably to minors.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Cranberries

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Moderators: Gary Sax
Time to create page: 0.389 seconds