So, after the gaming weekend (see the synopsis below), I have indeed made some purchases.
I decided to buy Lords of Waterdeep! And even though I hadn't tried the expansion yet, I figured I'd just go ahead and get that out of the way, along with the single promo card available on BoardGameGeek.
Hopefully the game will arrive within the next few days, and even more hopefully, maybe I can convince the wife to try it out ;)
(It may even be on my son's level sooner than I think...)
I also threw Love Letter into the order, because I've been meaning to. It's a $10 game that keeps coming up on suggestion lists...
Maybe you can come by sometime and play with me? :)
Monday, December 9, 2013
Chris-A-Con Recap
This past weekend, I had the pleasure of being able to play lots and lots of boardgames.
Spoiler: No BSG!
Here are the highlights; if you want pictures, I have a few, but most of them are blurry or not very interesting.
First up was Smash Up, a game that is on my wishlist because of its silliness.
Zombie Bear Cavalry (me) vs. Ghost Wizards vs. Steampunk Pirates vs. Ninja Dinosaurs.
Not sure if Zombies + Bears was a good combo or not. Zombies like to be destroyed and come back, and Bears like to be indestructible. But whatever.
It was a fun game, but it lasted a lot longer than expected.
The rules are a little bit unclear on what happens when there's a tie, so we kept playing until somebody had the most points for an entire round around the table. This led to some semi-cooperative strategies, where 3 players would work together to make the game go on longer. So it was about a 2 hour long game.
I don't think that usually happens.
Ossian's review: GRRRR . Would play again, but might not buy.
Sentinels of the Multiverse came next. A cooperative superhero game. It is beautiful, but I'm not sure about it.
We played against the easiest villain (according to the experienced players; Baron Blade?) and it was a little too easy. We reprised the game on Sunday and played against Miss Information, and the game was a lot more tense (we did win but barely).
As far as pure cooperative games go, it told a good story but I wish it could be tweaked just a little bit so the bad guy could make choices, a sort of traitor mechanic.
Ossian's review: GRRR . Would go along with a suggestion to play this again, but wouldn't go out of my way for it.
And then came Takenoko , a game I brought. My gardener's head snapped off in a 5-year-old incident, so this was the "Chewbaccanoko" version. Still, gameplay was great, and it was a nice little filler-with-some-strategy game. My first time playing with 4 players and I loved it.
Ossian's review: GRRRRR. I own it, and I recommend it.
After that came Lords of Waterdeep, a game I specifically wanted to try out, and Dan had brought.
We played the base game, and I really liked it. I don't play very many Worker Placement games, but I thought that there were plenty of interesting choices, and while I lost, I had a good time. I had the Lord who wanted me to build buildings, and maybe focused a little too much on that, for not enough reward.
Had an excellent time with this and will buy it.
Ossian's review: GRRRRR. More fun than anticipated. Will buy, and consider blindly buying the expansion as well.
The final game of the night was Super Dungeon Explore. I actually picked this game to play, and I think I regret it.
It was a nice-looking game, and the theme is cool. But the game might be one of those where it really doesn't get fun until people really understand the rules. Too much fiddly "what does this keyword mean?" etc for not too much gain. By the time I had figured out what was going on in any way, my character was dead.
I'll pass on this one, especially for the price.
Ossian's review: GRR. I don't want to play this again. But it's a game, and I'll play it if it's the only option.
On Sunday, as I said, we played Sentinels of the Multiverse for a second time.
Also played an incomplete game of Agricola (we stopped when one player was clearly far ahead and more people had shown up so we could switch games).
I had never played Agricola before, surprisingly.. but after playing Lords of Waterdeep, the Worker Placement mechanic was still fresh in my mind.
I have to make direct comparisons between these 2 games because they are so similar yet so different.
Lords has a more-focused goal, where Agricola is all over the place.
Every Lords card follows a pretty small set of rules, where Agricola cards can have a ton of text.
Comparing these games is like comparing San Juan and Race for the Galaxy. In that case, I much prefer San Juan because I don't have to worry about what all those icons and special rules mean.
In the case of Agricola and Lords, it's not quite as clear of a distinction.
I liked both, but I think I liked Lords more. I would totally play Agricola again, but probably won't buy it any time soon.
If I do ever buy Agricola, I'll also feel compelled to collect all of those mini-expansions. It's just my nature.
So I'm safer staying away from buying it.
That being said, if you see it on my amazon wishlist, I wouldn't be disappointed to receive it ;)
Ossian's review: GRRRRr. Would play again. It was really good. Maybe I'm a bigger fan of Worker Placement than I realized. May buy in the future, but not yet.
So, that's basically it for now.
As some bonus content: One game that we did not play, which I still might buy, is Formula D. It's a game about car racing, which of course my 5-year-old son is really into anyway. When I think he can handle something slightly more complex that his rule-less playing with Hot Wheels, maybe I'll pick this up. Perhaps an appropriate Father's Day gift... :)
Spoiler: No BSG!
Here are the highlights; if you want pictures, I have a few, but most of them are blurry or not very interesting.
First up was Smash Up, a game that is on my wishlist because of its silliness.
Zombie Bear Cavalry (me) vs. Ghost Wizards vs. Steampunk Pirates vs. Ninja Dinosaurs.
Not sure if Zombies + Bears was a good combo or not. Zombies like to be destroyed and come back, and Bears like to be indestructible. But whatever.
It was a fun game, but it lasted a lot longer than expected.
The rules are a little bit unclear on what happens when there's a tie, so we kept playing until somebody had the most points for an entire round around the table. This led to some semi-cooperative strategies, where 3 players would work together to make the game go on longer. So it was about a 2 hour long game.
I don't think that usually happens.
Ossian's review: GRRRR . Would play again, but might not buy.
Sentinels of the Multiverse came next. A cooperative superhero game. It is beautiful, but I'm not sure about it.
We played against the easiest villain (according to the experienced players; Baron Blade?) and it was a little too easy. We reprised the game on Sunday and played against Miss Information, and the game was a lot more tense (we did win but barely).
As far as pure cooperative games go, it told a good story but I wish it could be tweaked just a little bit so the bad guy could make choices, a sort of traitor mechanic.
Ossian's review: GRRR . Would go along with a suggestion to play this again, but wouldn't go out of my way for it.
And then came Takenoko , a game I brought. My gardener's head snapped off in a 5-year-old incident, so this was the "Chewbaccanoko" version. Still, gameplay was great, and it was a nice little filler-with-some-strategy game. My first time playing with 4 players and I loved it.
Ossian's review: GRRRRR. I own it, and I recommend it.
After that came Lords of Waterdeep, a game I specifically wanted to try out, and Dan had brought.
We played the base game, and I really liked it. I don't play very many Worker Placement games, but I thought that there were plenty of interesting choices, and while I lost, I had a good time. I had the Lord who wanted me to build buildings, and maybe focused a little too much on that, for not enough reward.
Had an excellent time with this and will buy it.
Ossian's review: GRRRRR. More fun than anticipated. Will buy, and consider blindly buying the expansion as well.
The final game of the night was Super Dungeon Explore. I actually picked this game to play, and I think I regret it.
It was a nice-looking game, and the theme is cool. But the game might be one of those where it really doesn't get fun until people really understand the rules. Too much fiddly "what does this keyword mean?" etc for not too much gain. By the time I had figured out what was going on in any way, my character was dead.
I'll pass on this one, especially for the price.
Ossian's review: GRR. I don't want to play this again. But it's a game, and I'll play it if it's the only option.
On Sunday, as I said, we played Sentinels of the Multiverse for a second time.
Also played an incomplete game of Agricola (we stopped when one player was clearly far ahead and more people had shown up so we could switch games).
I had never played Agricola before, surprisingly.. but after playing Lords of Waterdeep, the Worker Placement mechanic was still fresh in my mind.
I have to make direct comparisons between these 2 games because they are so similar yet so different.
Lords has a more-focused goal, where Agricola is all over the place.
Every Lords card follows a pretty small set of rules, where Agricola cards can have a ton of text.
Comparing these games is like comparing San Juan and Race for the Galaxy. In that case, I much prefer San Juan because I don't have to worry about what all those icons and special rules mean.
In the case of Agricola and Lords, it's not quite as clear of a distinction.
I liked both, but I think I liked Lords more. I would totally play Agricola again, but probably won't buy it any time soon.
If I do ever buy Agricola, I'll also feel compelled to collect all of those mini-expansions. It's just my nature.
So I'm safer staying away from buying it.
That being said, if you see it on my amazon wishlist, I wouldn't be disappointed to receive it ;)
Ossian's review: GRRRRr. Would play again. It was really good. Maybe I'm a bigger fan of Worker Placement than I realized. May buy in the future, but not yet.
So, that's basically it for now.
As some bonus content: One game that we did not play, which I still might buy, is Formula D. It's a game about car racing, which of course my 5-year-old son is really into anyway. When I think he can handle something slightly more complex that his rule-less playing with Hot Wheels, maybe I'll pick this up. Perhaps an appropriate Father's Day gift... :)
Monday, September 23, 2013
Breaking Bad ending predictions...
So yeah, that spoiler thing seemed to work.
If it did, click the button below to see more.
If it didn't, and if you care about plot points up through the second-to-last episode "Granite State", do not read below this line:
Saturday, July 27, 2013
Chromecast!
When Google announced the Chromecast a few days ago, at first I shrugged it off as "interesting, but whatever".
But then when I realized I could get it from Amazon with free Prime Shipping, and it came with 3 free months of Netflix even for existing customers, (sorry, the Netflix offer expired after they realized how broken it was) I just couldn't resist! A grand effective total of $11. I've paid more for stupider things.
So, because of Prime Shipping, it arrived only 2 days later.
Setup was simple. I did it from the Android app; it sets up an ad-hoc wifi network so that you can enter the real wifi credentials, and then you are ready for business.
And, for what it is, it does what it does well.
I installed the Android app, the Windows app, and the Chrome extension (on both my PC and my wife's Mac)
I was able to stream youtube from both my phone and both PCs with no problem.
For Netflix, the first time I tried, Silverlight crashed. But the second time it was just fine.
For "tab casting", I had some trouble, but it turned out that it doesn't work so well with AMD Switchable Graphics, which is exactly what I have in my primary laptop. I get mixed results there, but it does work with Chrome on the Macbook. I'll just have to sit tight and wait for them to fix that other bug.
Tab Casting is pretty interesting. The number one reason is -- at least for now -- free Hulu works! Even in Full Screen!
So we can project Hulu videos -- or videos from any site that doesn't have an "app" interface for the Chromecast -- onto the TV with the greatest of ease.
For Hulu specifically, I suspect that will be getting blocked as soon as they figure out how.
What I haven't tried yet is playing a local video file in a tab and pushing it to the Chromecast. This allegedly works...
Now the downsides:
Other than the bugs, which I hope are getting worked on, and the limited number of things that work with it outside of the Chrome browser..
1) It isn't really easily controllable. It's not for everyone. You still need a PC or smartphone to control the content, and especially with broadcasting a tab, it means controlling it from the actual webpage on your screen. This isn't as easy for Netflix as using the PS3 remote, which my 5-year-old can do by himself.
2) Video quality -- well, this could be psychological, but we noticed that some videos seemed to be lower quality. That being said, the "tabcasting" feature caps at 720p so that might have something to do with it, but it was even the case with Youtube. It's too early to tell whether that was just a matter of the videos we chose, or a real issue.
That's all I can really say so far.
Do I recommend it for nerds? Sure.
Will I use it every day? Probably not.
Do I recommend it for normal people, over some other streaming box? Maybe not until more content is directly supported. Even though it's a mere $35, I think you might still be better off spending more money on something easier to use.
But then when I realized I could get it from Amazon with free Prime Shipping, and it came with 3 free months of Netflix even for existing customers, (sorry, the Netflix offer expired after they realized how broken it was) I just couldn't resist! A grand effective total of $11. I've paid more for stupider things.
So, because of Prime Shipping, it arrived only 2 days later.
Setup was simple. I did it from the Android app; it sets up an ad-hoc wifi network so that you can enter the real wifi credentials, and then you are ready for business.
And, for what it is, it does what it does well.
I installed the Android app, the Windows app, and the Chrome extension (on both my PC and my wife's Mac)
I was able to stream youtube from both my phone and both PCs with no problem.
For Netflix, the first time I tried, Silverlight crashed. But the second time it was just fine.
For "tab casting", I had some trouble, but it turned out that it doesn't work so well with AMD Switchable Graphics, which is exactly what I have in my primary laptop. I get mixed results there, but it does work with Chrome on the Macbook. I'll just have to sit tight and wait for them to fix that other bug.
Tab Casting is pretty interesting. The number one reason is -- at least for now -- free Hulu works! Even in Full Screen!
So we can project Hulu videos -- or videos from any site that doesn't have an "app" interface for the Chromecast -- onto the TV with the greatest of ease.
For Hulu specifically, I suspect that will be getting blocked as soon as they figure out how.
What I haven't tried yet is playing a local video file in a tab and pushing it to the Chromecast. This allegedly works...
Now the downsides:
Other than the bugs, which I hope are getting worked on, and the limited number of things that work with it outside of the Chrome browser..
1) It isn't really easily controllable. It's not for everyone. You still need a PC or smartphone to control the content, and especially with broadcasting a tab, it means controlling it from the actual webpage on your screen. This isn't as easy for Netflix as using the PS3 remote, which my 5-year-old can do by himself.
2) Video quality -- well, this could be psychological, but we noticed that some videos seemed to be lower quality. That being said, the "tabcasting" feature caps at 720p so that might have something to do with it, but it was even the case with Youtube. It's too early to tell whether that was just a matter of the videos we chose, or a real issue.
That's all I can really say so far.
Do I recommend it for nerds? Sure.
Will I use it every day? Probably not.
Do I recommend it for normal people, over some other streaming box? Maybe not until more content is directly supported. Even though it's a mere $35, I think you might still be better off spending more money on something easier to use.
Thursday, July 25, 2013
"What's a MOBA?"
Last night, after failing to resume the previous week's Civ V multiplayer game because of a combination of general Steam issues and an apparently crappy "set up multiplayer game" UI (according to the host), I was told to download and try out League of Legend.
Kevin explained to me that it was a "moba" as if I would know what that word meant. He didn't even give me room to ask, so I had to google it and find out that there's a rich history behind this specific type of game.
Apparently this is a whole class of games that already has a huge lexicon associated with it, and players on public internet games who are nothing but newbie-hating dicks.
The tutorial told me "Get In Your Lane" without explaining that terminology, for example.
And the tutorial even called me bad names for idling too long when I went to talk to my wife just getting home from work. It said it might flag me for bad behavior -- in a single player tutorial!
I didn't play long enough to say I've formulated a full opinion on the game, but I didn't seem to understand what the big deal was after playing through the tutorial. I'll have to try it.
The same Kevin tried to get me into a similar, but turn-based, game on iOS. I think maybe it was called "Hero Academy"? I got bored of that one pretty quickly too (not just because I kept losing, but because there wasn't a lot of variety in what you could do), so maybe this just isn't my style of video game.
(Ironically, a game like Hero Academy in boardgame form might actually be fun for me. I dunno why)
Kevin explained to me that it was a "moba" as if I would know what that word meant. He didn't even give me room to ask, so I had to google it and find out that there's a rich history behind this specific type of game.
Apparently this is a whole class of games that already has a huge lexicon associated with it, and players on public internet games who are nothing but newbie-hating dicks.
The tutorial told me "Get In Your Lane" without explaining that terminology, for example.
And the tutorial even called me bad names for idling too long when I went to talk to my wife just getting home from work. It said it might flag me for bad behavior -- in a single player tutorial!
I didn't play long enough to say I've formulated a full opinion on the game, but I didn't seem to understand what the big deal was after playing through the tutorial. I'll have to try it.
The same Kevin tried to get me into a similar, but turn-based, game on iOS. I think maybe it was called "Hero Academy"? I got bored of that one pretty quickly too (not just because I kept losing, but because there wasn't a lot of variety in what you could do), so maybe this just isn't my style of video game.
(Ironically, a game like Hero Academy in boardgame form might actually be fun for me. I dunno why)
Wednesday, July 17, 2013
BSG Personal Goals Variant
Ooh... gaming content!
Here's a little idea I had about BSG rules, which may be rendered completely obsolete by something in Daybreak. But hey..
Cross-posting to the boardgamegeek forum: http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/1007661/making-personal-goals-more-like-personal-goals
I really don't like Personal Goals, conceptually.
They are completely backwards. Most of the time, even though it's called a personal goal, you have pretty much no incentive to fulfill its conditions unless the listed resource is specifically low. And due to the replacement clause, you are unlikely to even think about some of them until after Distance 6.
So here's my simple idea, instead of "Lose this resource at the end of the game" clause (untested):
Note that this still only matters in a "Humans Win" situation. An unrevealed Cylon with a Personal Goal follows the same rules.
I think that this simple change isn't overpowered, yet still gives players just enough push to try and fulfill their personal goals early and often.
It also gives more incentive for protecting raptors after scouting is irrelevant, if you have Goals that may not be achievable.
Your thoughts?
Here's a little idea I had about BSG rules, which may be rendered completely obsolete by something in Daybreak. But hey..
Cross-posting to the boardgamegeek forum: http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/1007661/making-personal-goals-more-like-personal-goals
I really don't like Personal Goals, conceptually.
They are completely backwards. Most of the time, even though it's called a personal goal, you have pretty much no incentive to fulfill its conditions unless the listed resource is specifically low. And due to the replacement clause, you are unlikely to even think about some of them until after Distance 6.
So here's my simple idea, instead of "Lose this resource at the end of the game" clause (untested):
At the end of the game, reveal all unfulfilled Personal Goals.
For each unfulfilled Personal Goal, destroy one raptor. If there are no raptors, lower one resource with the lowest value by 1 instead.
Note that this still only matters in a "Humans Win" situation. An unrevealed Cylon with a Personal Goal follows the same rules.
I think that this simple change isn't overpowered, yet still gives players just enough push to try and fulfill their personal goals early and often.
It also gives more incentive for protecting raptors after scouting is irrelevant, if you have Goals that may not be achievable.
Your thoughts?
Friday, June 7, 2013
The Next Doctor.. sort of..
This post is kind of spoilery about the latest stuff known about Doctor Who..
So, if you're a fan and you're not up-to-date, skip it.
And if you really don't care for Doctor Who, skip it.
So here's what we know, or what we think we know:
* Clara has become The Impossible Girl, but is still appearing in the next season somehow.
* John Hurt is probably some regeneration that We Don't Talk About from the past, between 8 and 9. Possibly the Shalka Doctor?
* Matt Smith is leaving the show after the Christmas Special.
Here is what I want to happen:
At the end of the Christmas Special, the Eleventh Doctor dies. But they don't show him regenerating.
Cut immediately to the Eighth Doctor -- special guest star Paul McGann -- regenerating into John Hurt.
John soon encounters Clara Oswald, although yet another incarnation who is a stranger to the Doctor.
What ensues is the darkest, grittiest season of the show yet. We see the Time War. We see the atrocities committed by Doctor 8.5, as Clara tries desperately to stop him and keep him under control.
During this season we HATE the Doctor. He is a villain in the extreme. Maybe he even uses a different name. We see Time Lords dying. Maybe his own family. Maybe an encounter where The Master is portrayed as the good guy.
And then, as the darkness of the Time War comes to a close, the John Hurt doctor finally meets his death after a single season, regenerating into special guest star Christopher Eccleston.
Then we fade back to the "present time", where Eleven is in his death throes, and begins regenerating into.. someone new, but that's not important right now.
How does that sound?
So, if you're a fan and you're not up-to-date, skip it.
And if you really don't care for Doctor Who, skip it.
So here's what we know, or what we think we know:
* Clara has become The Impossible Girl, but is still appearing in the next season somehow.
* John Hurt is probably some regeneration that We Don't Talk About from the past, between 8 and 9. Possibly the Shalka Doctor?
* Matt Smith is leaving the show after the Christmas Special.
Here is what I want to happen:
At the end of the Christmas Special, the Eleventh Doctor dies. But they don't show him regenerating.
Cut immediately to the Eighth Doctor -- special guest star Paul McGann -- regenerating into John Hurt.
John soon encounters Clara Oswald, although yet another incarnation who is a stranger to the Doctor.
What ensues is the darkest, grittiest season of the show yet. We see the Time War. We see the atrocities committed by Doctor 8.5, as Clara tries desperately to stop him and keep him under control.
During this season we HATE the Doctor. He is a villain in the extreme. Maybe he even uses a different name. We see Time Lords dying. Maybe his own family. Maybe an encounter where The Master is portrayed as the good guy.
And then, as the darkness of the Time War comes to a close, the John Hurt doctor finally meets his death after a single season, regenerating into special guest star Christopher Eccleston.
Then we fade back to the "present time", where Eleven is in his death throes, and begins regenerating into.. someone new, but that's not important right now.
How does that sound?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
