Menu Close

** La Isla (2014) – Stefan Feld

I’ve always taken people’s criticisms of Feld’s designs as “soulless Euros” or “dry cube-pushers” with a grain of salt and roll of the eyes, but games like La Isla make it all too apparent there’s a kernel of truth to such disparaging remarks.  This is a game with no attention paid to anything other than making a bunch of little systems talk to each other.  It has no theme, no narrative, no player interaction, no meta, and only the thinnest veneer of strategy.  It is also one of the most repetitive games I’ve ever played.  Your turns are indistinguishable from each other.  You do the same actions in the same order every single round.  A designer with a smaller pedigree would’ve never gotten this published, at least not without a pretty significant overhaul.  La Isla‘s flaws are way too obvious and way too severe.  Hey, at least that means this should be a quick review!

La Isla is a card game about capturing endangered animals on an island.  You start by setting up the island and distributing 5 different species of creatures randomly across the board.  Each creature space is bounded by 2-4 player spaces that you will be placing workers into to surround and capture them.  Every turn, players draw 3 cards and assign them to 1 of 3 actions.  One will be used to learn its pictured ability, one will be used to take its pictured resource, and one will be used to increase the point value of its pictured animal species.  Abilities are mostly of the “if you do this, then you also get to do this” variety, and you can keep up to 3 active at any given time.  The 5 different resources are used to place workers on island spaces of the matching color.  After all players finish allocating cards, they take their turns.  Every turn resolves the same way: 1) learn an ability, 2) get a resource, 3) place a worker or take another resource, 4) bump up an animal’s value.  There is no variability to this whatsoever.  I suppose it’s a positive that play is mostly simultaneous, but it’s only because players essentially don’t interact with each other.  You can’t even block spaces.  I suppose you could try snagging animals your opponents are going for, but you can only place one worker a round so they’ll see you coming a mile away.  Kinda pointless.  Anyway, points are earned by surrounding and capturing animals, using certain abilities, and at the end of the game for having complete sets of all 5 animals.  You also score bonus points based on the ending values of the animals in your collection, so make sure you bump up the animals you have the most of!  Oh yeah, these animal values are also the game end trigger which is pretty weird.

Hoo boy, the monotony of this game cannot be overstated.  The only thing that gives even a modicum of uniqueness to your turns is whatever your current set of abilities are, but it’s not like they change all that much either.  “Oh, I get 2 points when I place on yellow spaces now.”  “Oh, I only pay one white cube instead of two white cubes when I place on white spaces now.”  “Oh, I draw 4 cards instead of 3.”  “Oh, if I bump up this animals value I also get a free resource.”  So on and so forth.  And these abilities are by FAR the most interesting thing in the game.  The rest of the game’s systems are so dull it almost seems purposeful.  I suppose there’s some tactical considerations in managing your resources, but a large portion of the card abilities earn you additional resources so it’s hardly a brain burn.  The card programming, area enclosure, set collection, and variable scoring, however?  These are some of the most immobile mechanics of any Euro I’ve played.  Interacting with them is like playing tennis with a wall.  The modular board layout and deluge of cards do not make up for the game’s tedium in the slightest.

I feel no need to examine the game with any further granularity.  It should be obvious why this is a bad design.  But just in case it isn’t, allow me to throw in a few final criticisms: its decision tree is tiny, it allows very little room for long-term strategy or clever card combinations, and it’s way too rules-heavy for how simple of a game it is.  Is that better?  Listen, I am far from anti-Feld.  I have played other designs of his that I’ve enjoyed quite a bit.  His systems-first approach has resulted in some tight, tactical designs.  La Isla just ain’t one of them.  I don’t care about its lack of proper theming, unimaginative artwork, or poor production.  I care that this is a 100% mechanics-first design, and its mechanics aren’t any good.

La Isla gets a rating of TWO out of FIVE, indicating it is NOT RECOMMENDED.