What BOARD GAME(s) have you been playing?

I think the terms "failed" and "disappeared" are being thrown around a little too liberally.

Rampage and Steam Park were both big hits. They've gone through multiple print runs and sold thousands of copies. Any game that moves at least 2-3k units is doing pretty good.

If you use the metric of still being talked about regularly 1 year from release what games haven't disappeared? The industry is one big subway station with gentle neighbors and triumphant world beaters getting off and hopping on. Great people are met, connections are made, love is gained and lost. It's a world of transient potential and everlasting hope.

What games haven't disappeared? The successes.

By the metric of purely moving units and leaving the company in the black that means Nickleback is a success. And I refuse to live in a world where Nickleback is a success.

Here's why I feel both Steam Park and Rampage failed - They were sold (and thousands of units moved) based on the idea and concept behind them. Smashing monsters and building a theme park. Where the designers and developers failed is not fully realizing and exploiting the concept and idea behind their game and instead did things like a gimmicky speed dice rolling mechanic, a non-decision decision point of what to seed the robot bag with. Concerning oneself with teeth count, a well balanced color meal or hidden cards.

After those thousands of units moved thought the veil was pulled back and gamers realized that the mark was missed. That's why they've disappeared from the conversation, there is no longer the excitement (and ignorance) of what the game could be, but the reality of what the game is.

To tie in the conversation on the front page, one thing that I feel Cory K does really well is identifying what makes a design or concept compelling and then really focuses on those concepts and ideas.

I don't think Rampage failed - the game is actually really fun, especially as a filler/family game. A lot of people sure do own it as well. Steam park...can't help there.

VonTush wrote: Here's why I feel both Steam Park and Rampage failed - They were sold (and thousands of units moved) based on the idea and concept behind them. Smashing monsters and building a theme park. Where the designers and developers failed is not fully realizing and exploiting the concept and idea behind their game and instead did things like a gimmicky speed dice rolling mechanic, a non-decision decision point of what to seed the robot bag with. Concerning oneself with teeth count, a well balanced color meal or hidden cards.

After those thousands of units moved thought the veil was pulled back and gamers realized that the mark was missed. That's why they've disappeared from the conversation, there is no longer the excitement (and ignorance) of what the game could be, but the reality of what the game is.

To tie in the conversation on the front page, one thing that I feel Cory K does really well is identifying what makes a design or concept compelling and then really focuses on those concepts and ideas.

What doesn't make sense though is that you are blending subjective opinion with objective observation (people talking about it). If you subjectively think Rampage failed, that's fine. But, my point in my last post was that people not talking about Rampage over a year after its release is indicative of nothing except the fact that tons of games come out. I can't think of any game that anyone still talks about a lot this far past its release. Even X-Wing only gets mentioned once a month or so on here.


Also, I agree with Pete and don't think Rampage failed. I aggressively cleanse my collection and it's still there.

My kids would kill me if I got rid of Rampage.

However, there is an interesting point to be made here:

What it reminds me of a lot actually is Rampage. Both games have elements that are bolted on to give this illusion that there is more game there. And with both games these bolted on elements cause the game to lose focus. And to be honest I think this lack of focus and identity is what caused these games to release to a bit of fanfare but in the end fade away quickly and quietly.

This is something that DEFINITELY affects Rampage. I think it's pretty telling that I haven't even unwrapped the cards to play with adult friends. I looked at the rules and thought "why do you need all that crap, the action here is flicking, dropping and blowing". The funny thing is that it is EXACTLY the same problem as Kemble's Cascade- the designer didn't trust their game to be regarded as "A Game" (which may actually be a possibility given the way folks faff about things like there being "enough" game) so a bunchof "A Game" crap gets tacked on.

It's like looking at Checkers and thinking "hmm, this needs role selection and action cards to be A Game" instead of it being about a single type of movement and the strategy and gameplay originating from that single type of movement.

Come to think of it, I think this is the #1 thing that lots of post-FFG games are plagued with...this lack of focus on a core concept or mechanic. Look at the greatest games, they all DO NOT have a bunch of sub-systems and tacked-on jank. Cosmic Encounter is about the alliances and the powers EVEN WITH all of the tacked on jank from tons of expansions. It never loses that focus, for the most part. There's nothing added on to make gamers feel like they are playing A Game. Doesn't need to be.

Rampage should just be about knocking those stupid buildings down. Period. No special powers or any of that crap. That's where the game is. Not in stuff that causes the game to shift focus from that.

This also ties into the Corey K. discussion...for as much as I like his best games, they tend to have a lot of clutter and not enough focus. Witness BSG- the game with no expansions is a perfect balance between focus on the core concept/mechanics and just enough chrome to sell the narrative and setting. Add on the expansions, and you start piling on jank. Game loses focus. Does it become more of A Game? Not really.

Think about it. The games that stay evergreen are the ones that are REALLY focused...they may have some jank, but it fades into the background. Like Carcassonne- totally evergreen, but Princess & The Dragon? Not so much. Other examples- Ticket to Ride, Dominion, Settlers, Tigris and Euphrates, Dune, Space Hulk, Talisman, El Grande...even more complex designs like Puerto Rico have this sense of unity and self-contained focus. The games that really make an impact and don't fade out (like Steam Park and Rampage) are the ones that have a well-defined center and don't stray too far away from it, straining to be A Game.

Michael Barnes wrote: Think about it. The games that stay evergreen are the ones that are REALLY focused...they may have some jank, but it fades into the background. Like Carcassonne- totally evergreen, but Princess & The Dragon? Not so much. Other examples- Ticket to Ride, Dominion, Settlers, Tigris and Euphrates, Dune, Space Hulk, Talisman, El Grande...even more complex designs like Puerto Rico have this sense of unity and self-contained focus. The games that really make an impact and don't fade out (like Steam Park and Rampage) are the ones that have a well-defined center and don't stray too far away from it, straining to be A Game.

I think this is a good post, so don't let what I'm about to say disagree with that. But I want to put this out there genuinely to people reading this thread---do you guys play these "evergreen" games he talks about anymore?

I could live if I never played Ticket to Ride, Dominion, Carcasonne, and Talisman again (those are the ones I've played). I played a lot of them and they are great games! But I'm done with them because I've had enough of that tight single mechanic. Do you guys really continually revisit these classics? I know it's ERP for Barnes so maybe he does, but I'm done with most of those (save possibly settlers).

I guess I just disagree that that's the formula for "evergreen."

Last weekend my group that usually plays longer games instead played Ticket To Ride, Wings Of War, Lords Of Waterdeep, and 7 Wonders twice. So yes, I do play those games still sometimes. Tigris I could play everyday. I only have two Carcassonne games, City and Castle because they don't use expansions.

charlest wrote: But, my point in my last post was that people not talking about Rampage over a year after its release is indicative of nothing except the fact that tons of games come out. I can't think of any game that anyone still talks about a lot this far past its release. Even X-Wing only gets mentioned once a month or so on here.


Also, I agree with Pete and don't think Rampage failed. I aggressively cleanse my collection and it's still there.

Ok, I'll buy the argument about discussion, that yes, lack of discussion doesn't equate to failure.

Let me further expand why I feel Rampage and Steam Park have failed and why for another game with a similar discussion cycle and number of copies sold I wouldn't label them as a failure.

Both Rampage and Steam Park I feel were games that could have done a whole lot more, they both have an amazing subject that has a very wide appeal way outside the appeals of geekdom. But those settings were taken and geek mechanics applied to them.

Were Rampage a little more focused, not as many board game geek type rules, I'd have bought a copy for my nephew a long time back. Were I playing by those geeky rules (my cards are still in shrink) my daughter wouldn't be on me to pull the game out to play a round like she has these past few weeks (she's been behind in schoolwork and has a little brother with busy hands so that's why it hasn't been to the table).

If Steam Park focused on the building aspect of the game rather than a dice gimmick of speed and a silly bag seeding which is really a non-choice, I'd have pulled this out for the wife a long, long time back. I'd have drug it to more game days.

Both of these games I feel could have a commercial success beyond hobby stores were they more focused, that's what I truly believe. And that's why I feel they were failures because I feel they could have been so much more. They're now just an obscure hobby game pulled out by hobbyists when they want to play something dumb and fun.

I see your point, but I don't know. When I get the card in Rampage that lets me flick other monsters as if they were a bus I'm fist-pumping.

God damn, I'm gonna agree with Barnes. Someone bring me a brandy and cold compress.

Expansions get made for games that don't need them, and they generally just bloat up a previously good design. They're good for publishers, not players. I have no clue why gamers buy them.

And thank you for going to Checkers for your example, because this transcends designer games. You want stunning simple games? Look at Chess or Bridge as examples.

And yes I do still play the simpler designs. Tonight was Bolide again and it was a fantastic play right down to the end. Recents have included Alhambra, Wings of War and 1775, a remarkably clean concept.

I'm still playing those. But then again, I'm sort of on ERP with my next purchases being Survive, Ticket to Ride and possibly a third euro/german family game. We don't get to play too much these days with an extremely active 9 months old, but I do want to play them.

Apropos of the discussion, I think I've played each of the listed "classic" games in the last six months, most of them in the last few weeks. I would add Splendor to that list in the future. These seem to me games that, while few people enthuse about them, always get played at the meet-up. Maybe because they have that clarity of design. They're like everyone's third choice and settle the debate on what to play.

screw your discussion, put it somewhere else where it won't get lost.

X-wing - Soontir Swarm vs Dash(Heavy laser cannon + Outrider) and B-wings. i was going to play a Defender/interceptor/Shuttle list, but we had a new player so I gave him three Tie Fighters, while I took Bombers and the Interceptor. He was a freaking natural, swinging ties in Formation through asteroid fields, breaking them off to slide by with milimeters to spare. Bombers went down quick to B-wing FCS fire...Soontir is a monster (and even more so now with Autothrusters) and just lived in the Dash Rendar Donut hole of doom. Scum and Villainy has started being sold in Australia. Soon....

Wiz-War with 5. wild game that had two wizards die (myself...10 points of damage in 1 turn, then a freaking wall of fire to block my way home) and the other two fighting tooth and nail to slow the winner down. Thank goodness this isn't Munchkin where all the cards slow people down. First time the Genie has come up....wow what a freaking crazy monster. I did manage to kill it before my glorious death by Fireball.

Cthulhu Wars - 3 player game using Cthulhu (me), Black Goat, and Crawling Chaos. As usual with 3 player games like this, I ended up winning when the other two guys went at it right away and left me alone to rack up a bunch of points early on and I jumped out to a big lead. They tried to band together to stop me, but it was too late. 3-player requires a very delicate balance between players to keep each other in check, which I imagine would be hard to do all the time. 3 player was a bit weak overall, but most games with 3 are.

The other notable thing that happened was we were talking about the extra 4 factions and 5-6 player games, and the guy who owns the game suggested we chip in for the 4 extra factions if we wanted them. He was not going to drop an extra $190 and then risk us never playing again. So between the 3 of us, it would be $62 each to get the 4 extra factions plus the 6-8 player board. A bit steep for me, but the deal is we each get to borrow/use the game whenever we want. I'm the one most likely to borrow it to play with people other than them, so it's not like it'll be checked out much and conflict with my own gaming sessions. So it's almost as if I am getting the base game and the extra factions for $70. At least, that's what I'm going to tell myself to justify it.