Arboretum is a really strange game that it is more interesting to think about when you’re not playing it than when you are. Then it’s just kinda annoying. It’s a confusing situation. I mean, I think this is a good game; all signs point to it being one, at least. It has simple rules, a smooth cadence, and a surprising amount of depth for a “filler” (a word best used in quotes). In a lot of ways it’s a difficult game to criticize, or at least to find the right words to do so. Nevertheless, a cursory look through some forum discussions reveals that it’s a surprisingly divisive title with many players passionately opining both for and against it — something quite atypical for lighter weight card games. So why exactly is Arboretum, a colorful game about building relaxing paths through resplendent trees, a game that some love and others revile? Well, seeing as I fall right in the middle of those two categories, perhaps I am the right man to answer that very question. As mentioned before, Arboretum‘s ruleset is quite simple. In fact, the “How To Play” section of the rulebook is a full two pages shorter than the sections on scoring. Shuffle a deck of cards with 6-10 suits of trees on them depending on player count, deal seven to each player, and put what’s left in the center of the table. Cards are ranked 1-8 indicating their value, and there is one card of each rank for every suit. On their turn…
Above And Below is an inoffensive game that gets by mostly on charm. Its few unique qualities (and they are few) are at best cute and at worst irrelevant. Nevertheless, there is an endearing auteur-like quality to the game due to it being entirely the product of Mr. One-Man Band Ryan Laukat — a game designer, illustrator, publisher, many-hat-wearing ultra-talent. Its whimsical art style, young adult fantasy theme, and storytelling elements are all clear constituents of a broader artistic vision, something rare and highly welcome to see in the board game space. But even so, Above And Below is really nothing special. I can think of no compelling argument in its favor that would elucidate its qualities in a way that gives it an edge against the dozens of equal or better games in its mechanical wheelhouse. In fact, its brief popularity has already been eclipsed by a sequel that came out a mere two years after: Near And Far. However, just because this is a game that may soon be sent adrift amongst the tides of time doesn’t mean it’s not a perfectly pleasant way to spend 60-90 minutes around the dining room table with a friend or two. No one would ever accuse Ryan Laukat of not doing his homework; he is very evidently a diligent student of modern game design. The mechanical net Above And Below casts is wide and varied, encapsulating an action point system, tableau-building, storytelling, and resource collection into a straightforward game about building villages and exploring caves. Each…
7 Wonders Duel is about what you’d expect when you redesign a game that goes up to 7 players to allow only 2. That’s not to say it’s bad, only that its balance between systems to interact with and players to interact with is a bit off. Fortunately, the systems here are enjoyably tight and have been buffed up with a pristine level of polish by veteran game authors Bauza and Cathala. Nevertheless, a game of 7 Wonders Duel feels as much like playing against it as it does your opponent. Co-operative games notwithstanding, that is rarely a good thing. No aspect of the game’s design plays to the strengths of 2-player experiences. You spend more mental energy calculating cost benefit analyses and counting icons than you do on responding to the other player’s actions. Because of this, 7 Wonders Duel, though cleverly built, is a somewhat lifeless game of resource optimization and multi-tasking that falls short of creating a compelling competitive dynamic between its players. The main thing 7 Wonders Duel succeeds at, and much of the praise it has been awarded is due to this, is updating the diverse elements of 7 Wonders to work smoothly in the context of 1v1. It is still a tableau builder played across three rounds called “Ages”, but player-to-player card drafting, 7 Wonders‘ mechanic magnefique, has been significantly retooled into a solitaire-esque spatial puzzle where cards are arranged in overlapping patterns and players take turns selecting from those unencumbered. Thusly, player selections free up cards underneath, creating pathways toward others…
WARNING: I don’t do spoiler-free reviews. If you want spoiler-free, this is not the blog for you. I did it, everyone. I finished a legacy game. And let me tell you, it was quite the roller coaster ride! Boring one minute, frustrating the next — I never knew what to expect! I now totally understand the appeal of stopping in the middle of a game to fiddle around with stickers and scratch-offs and to punch out new components. And I totally understand the appeal of having to read new rules every time I play a game. And I TOTALLY understand the appeal of having to undo all the work I did in previous games because of a TOTALLY epic plot twist. Ah, Legacy! A revolution in tabletop gaming! Surely, much has been said about the gamification of the boring parts of life, the chores. But Legacy games are the truly brilliant inverse of that: the chorification of games! Genius, I tell you! Genius! Alright, now that that’s out of my system — and likely the majority of the folks reading this are incensed — let’s get real. Pandemic Legacy: Season 1 is not a good board game. At best, I would consider it competent. It “works”, I suppose. Never before in gaming has a contrived narrative structure and gimmicky mechanical bait-and-switches led to such undeserved adulation as this. I mean, according to the users of Board Game Geek (which seems to be about 95% of the board game enthusiasts in the…
I’m not sure if The Grizzled is supposed to be fun or not, but it isn’t. Being someone that largely prefers games that are fun to games that are not fun, this puts me somewhat in opposition to it. Let me clarify that this has nothing to do with its morose WWI theme or attempt at evoking the abject despair of trench warfare. When I say “fun” I suppose what I’m really saying is “enjoyable” or “interesting”. In this sense, undeniably horrific films such as Idi i smotri or Schindler’s List are still experiences that I would qualify as “fun”. Basically, what I’m trying to say is that The Grizzled is unenjoyable and uninteresting. Rather, it is clumsy, confusing, and a failure at every level in immersing you in its theme. The Grizzled‘s rulebook begins with an “Intention Note” which illustrates the designers’ goal with the game: essentially, to emphasize the personal struggle of WWI soldiers to emotionally endure its hardship by forging intense bonds with their compatriots. Unfortunately to me, this note reads like an attempt at preempting criticism because the designers knew their game wasn’t very good. Then again, I am a cynical sort and tend to see examples of this sort of creative insincerity pretty much everywhere. What I can say for certain is that any rulebook that includes sentences like “At the same level as literature and cinema, games are a cultural medium which is undeniably participative.” is impossible to take seriously. What a clumsy sentence. What does it even mean? Games are…