Marvel Legendary - what the?!

I can't defend the graphic design, it's horrible. Personally I kinda like the art, others disagree. It was way too easy without the expansion. The expansion makes it harder but with so many variables, it's impossible to adjust the difficulty level with any consistency. It short, the game is a mess. But it's a fun mess with three people.

For those that don't like deckbuilders, give Core Worlds a try.

Ok Al, you guys play games of experience (Arkham and the like) as well as games of legit puzzle and competition. Here's the question -- where on the experience vs. competition arc do you put Legendary? What brings you the enjoyment in this one?

I'm not a big fan of deck-building in general because I feel like a victim in it more than an active player. Putting cooperation into the mix generally makes that worse though at least it keeps the conversation going.

And I still want a Kitty Pryde card but that's a separate issue.

What brings it in Legendary?

I sure would like to see deck-building as a following action instead of a leading one. I think that will be its next eureka moment.

S.

metalface13 wrote: I'm not an expert on these kinds of legal affairs, but Marvel may own the rights, but those artists get royalties every time their work gets reprinted. It's cheaper to use the crappy art. Also why that Batman game had the crappy commercial artist type art.

Maybe, but this game retails for $60. $60 for a handful of cards. Another joke considering the lack of thought that went into the design. I'd understand $60 if they were kicking royalties at some of their former artists and we had some iconic images here, but not for the product they're currently putting on the shelf.

I'm just dumbfounded by the whole thing. Granted the cards have better illustrations than anything I can do, but they don't even have the illustrator's names on the cards. I thought all modern card games did that. The mailroom guys sketch these things up over lunch?

I just wish Marvel cared more about putting out a quality product over making a very cheap buck. Having it's roots in the visual medium of comics, and coming later in the deckbuilder craze, the Marvel deckbuilder should look better than Dominion or Thunderstone. It does not.

No eBay APP ID défined in Kunena configuration

Sagrilarus wrote: Ok Al, you guys play games of experience (Arkham and the like) as well as games of legit puzzle and competition. Here's the question -- where on the experience vs. competition arc do you put Legendary? What brings you the enjoyment in this one?

Most certainly it is the experience aspect that excites me here. I'm not a big deckbuilder fan. There are a few exceptions (Core Worlds), but mostly they are good just as fillers, or mindless fun to relax with the wife. Legendary is the only deckbuilder that gives me a sense of narrative. Some of that, no doubt, is due to the familiarity of the characters. The game itself, however, does provide a good feeling of drama as it almost always seems like the superheros are going to be overwhelmed before they are able to pull it off in the end. A quick simple game that provides characters and storyline, what more could you ask for? The semicooperative thing is interesting as well, and I think the game would be less exciting if played as a straight cooperative.

ThirstyMan wrote: Seems a strange attack for The Punisher....Hail of Bullshit?

I suspect that Hail of Bullshit was the name of this game during the playtesting phase. They renamed it after getting the licensing from Marvel to paste the theme on this game.

Punisher looks like he's in a boy band.

You losers talked me into trying this game a second time. Now I feel used.

S.

Sagrilarus wrote: You losers talked me into trying this game a second time. Now I feel used.

S.

You mean it doesn't replace RPG's?

mikecl wrote:

Sagrilarus wrote: You losers talked me into trying this game a second time. Now I feel used.

S.

You mean it doesn't replace RPG's?

It's very mechanical. As best I can tell the images on the cards bear no relationship to their effects. I think there's dupes from one hero to the next.

As I played I was perceiving the underlying image as visual noise. I appreciate some don't like the layout, but that's not what I'm talking about. The imagery was an impediment to playing, so I found myself having to consciously tune it out to play. I wasn't ignoring the theme, I was rejecting it. Not good.

S.

Sagrilarus wrote: As I played I was perceiving the underlying image as visual noise. I appreciate some don't like the layout, but that's not what I'm talking about. The imagery was an impediment to playing, so I found myself having to consciously tune it out to play. I wasn't ignoring the theme, I was rejecting it. Not good.

Yes, it is a visual mess, but that doesn't mean there isn't a good game burried underneath. Maybe not good enough to make up for the squinting, but good nonetheless. Perhaps it's time for some decent reading glasses?

No, my point is just the opposite. I had good glasses and could see well enough, it was more that the art was misleading. Wolverine cards don't have any commonality -- there's Collossus cards that are more similar than other Wolverine cards. The theme actually contradicts the game action.

It's not a crisis, but tuning out the art actually aids game play.

S.