Game Day Humor

I went to a game session today at a game store. We were playing board games in the back while a wild pack of kids was playing Magic out front. During a game of Mexica, one of them was wandering around, stopped at our table, and asked what the game was about...

Us: Players are trying to form regions of various sizes using water tiles, then compete for control of them by placing buildings of various sizes.
Kid: Oh, so it's like Risk. [And proceeds to walk away]

Later on, there was a huge commotion out front, with everyone "gathering" around one table shouting. I asked the game store owner what was going on...

Owner: It's the draft for Magic.
Me: [Loudly] Oh, so it's like Risk.

On Twitter

Some games rules posted by BGN were not available without a Twitter account. I signed up, and now I guess I'm on Twitter too.

Mike Doyle: Form Follows Function Fallacy Fail

Since he doesn't allow comments any more, consider this a public place to respond to this steaming pile of crap. Rather than rip it to shreds one paragraph at a time, I'll simply say: Mike just doesn't get it. His erudition may work on a bunch of ignorant suits in a boardroom, but in the context of responding to feedback from the consumer it's meaningless.

100,000 hits!

Today this blog officially reached 100,000 hits. With all possible access methods (eg feeds), I'm not sure if this means anything any more, but it's still a fun statistic to watch. Thanks to all my readers. I know I haven't been posting much lately. Other than being kinda busy for a while, what else have I been up to lately?

Today I played my 100th game of Dominion on BSW. It's a great game, and I'll have a lot to say on it in my next blog post.

The Metagamers (Mark and I) challenged Into the Gamescape (Mike and Si, sans Paul) to a game of Amun-Re on SBW. It just started.

I've accepted Mark Johnson's recent public invitation to play Vinci on Online-Vinci. This is a great game that I don't get to play face-to-face very often.

LobsterTrap--basically a smaller Gathering of Friends, east--starts in 9 days. Looking forward to checking out a lot of Essen (and other) games: After the Flood, Battlestar Galactica, Cavum, Chicago Express, Confucius, Ghost Stories, Le Havre, Master of Rules, Middle Kingdom, Name of the Rose, Powerboats, Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm, Steel Driver, and Sylla.

If any of my readers are going to LobsterTrap, I'd love to play the following games: Container, Dune, Eketorp, Mordred, Neuland, Pizarro & Co, Scripts and Scribes, The Circle, and Through the Ages.

I'm The Best Friend You've Got

Let's make no pretenses; board games are a business. Although most people involved do what they do out of passion for the hobby, most cannot do so for free, or worse, at a loss. And being a consumer business, the evaluation of the "quality" of the product is not up to "the professionals" to decide. It is up to the consumers.

The problem is that we are all different. We all have different requirements, different tastes, different degrees of tolerance for choices made by the publisher, the designer, the graphic designer, etc. Do these creative people really want us to "quit whining"? If they only sell half as many copies of XYZ as expected, don't they really want to know why? It's not just about the one game; it's about their future.

W Eric Martin did an excellent job listing many of the tough decisions that publishers must weigh when producing a game. But by what criteria are they to make these decisions? It should be based on customer feedback. If you lean towards higher quality bits, then, yes, some customers are going to complain about the cost. The only way to handle the situation is to take all feedback, and use it to make future choices. As long as customers know that the publishers are listening, they will understand. This does not mean they should "quit whining".

Let's put something in perspective. If player A doesn't like something about a board game, and player B doesn't mind, then player A is a whiner. If player A wants a clarification on an ambiguous rule, and player B "knows" what it means, then player A is a rules lawyer. Everyone is a "whiner" or a "rules lawyer" when put into the proper circumstances. Stop being hypocrites.

What about the common "vote with your wallet" attitude? I don't think anyone wants that, certainly not the publishers. There are games that are too awful for me to buy, and games that are within my tolerances. I assume the publisher would rather that I buy the game and give them feedback, than not buy it at all.

I want all publishers to succeed. When I make negative comments about their games, it is with the intention of helping them to improve (this time or next time).

So who the hell am I? I'm no one in particular. I am not a trend-setter. I am often in the minority in my opinions. But I am always honest, straight, and speak in good faith. I am not out to harm or even disrespect publishers, designers, or others. And, no, telling someone you don't like something they spent months working on is not disrespectful. Lying about how you feel--or equivocating--is.

Knizia said, "When playing a game, the goal is to win. But it is the goal that is important, not the winning." This is true of publishing as well. The goal is perfection. Is it important that you strive for perfection, not that you reach it. That's what I want to see more of.

So who the hell am I? I'm the best friend you've got.

I don't care who you are, I will always tell you what I think. I want you to succeed. I want your games to get better and better. And I want to buy them. If I stop caring about you, I will stop talking to you. Don't get too comfy with your fanboys; they will be the ones standing on your shoulders as you sink into the mud.

Too Much Theme?

To me, the purpose of theme in rulebooks and game design is to provide a context for the actions you are taking. This makes learning and playing the game easier, and, hopefully, more enjoyable. When mechanics and theme mesh well, you get immersion; what you are doing at the table is somehow analogous to what you are doing in the game's world.

My initial reactions to Race for the Galaxy were not positive. My best explanation was that the game was too complicated for what it was. I like San Juan quite a bit--even more than Puerto Rico--but Race somehow crossed a line. My attempts to explain my attitude in more detail to other gamers were not satisfactory--to them or to myself. Something wasn't right, but I wasn't all that interested in working it out.

One thing I've learned, though, is not to give up on a game too easily. If only one out of five games that I think I dislike is a hidden gem, then it's worth the effort. Did I learn/play it incorrectly? Did I play with the wrong number of players to fully appreciate it? Did some critical aspect of play go unnoticed?

After my first few plays, Maharaja was at the bottom of my game pile, possibly never to be played again. Fortunately, I was in a position years later to really see this game shine. It's now a 10.

So what do I mean by "too much theme"? In this case, I'm referring solely to the game's rules. For me, there was a big disconnect in my ability to associate verb with action, and my mind would not allow me to work just a little harder to get over the hump. Race was supposed to be a light game, after all.

Thematically, exploration is about adding new tiles/areas to the board (eg Lost Valley, Entdecker). Settling is about building villages/bases on already-explored places (eg Settlers of Catan, Carcassonne: Hunters & Gatherers). Trading is about exchanging resources with other players (eg Settlers of Catan, Traders of Genoa).

In Race, exploration and production are about drawing cards, development and settling are about playing cards, and consumption is about discarding cards for more cards and/or VP's. The complex iconography that supports these actions just added to my mental block. I think the game would be better served by rules that were a little more "mechanical in theme". Reef Encounter could use a similar treatment; its rules read like a marine biology textbook.

After a last-ditch re-read of the rules, I was able to internalize the mental associations between theme and mechanics. From a game play point of view, the theme works well. I just think it doesn't promote a good understanding of the mechanics. The iconography is, in fact, pretty well thought out. The only thing I would change would be to remove the gray background for non-producing worlds, as it serves no purpose. I might also print the titles on the action cards in a much larger size so they can be seen more easily from across the table.

Race is now on my want list. So, a special thanks to all my GeekBuddies, who seem to know me better than I know myself.


Race for the Galaxy image by Rokkr.

Game Spotting 106 - Board Warp

Check out this GeekList. How many game boards can you recognize once they've been passed through a crazy Photoshop filter? Some you might be able to guess by color, by shape, or by patterns. Some are easier to see at high resolution, and some at low. I had fun with this. A few I had to stare at a while trying to twist my brain into different thinking modes. I might have gotten 20. One I figured out after submitting my answers.

How many can you get?