|
esquilax posted:It's not hard to find the thread. quote:I don't know why you guys are helldumping that particular thread, it's just a dude asking for sci-fi game recommendations and then getting them. Goons are weird It's not the thread — it's the reasoning behind the recommendations.
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2015 21:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 11:22 |
|
|
Countblanc posted:I've never played it, but Warhammer Diskwars gets mentioned every once and again and uses that sorta mechanic. Did someone say Diskwars, aka Best Wrestler Simulator 2014?  (coming soon) (no, I'll never stop trying to get people to try Diskwars)
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2015 21:35
|
|
|
Tekopo's new avatar is much more boring and less fun than the Bad Game Crew one. Whoever bought him that awful Desert War one should feel awful about themselves.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2015 22:10
|
|
|
PerniciousKnid posted:Edit: What the hell is a Vorthos? Did I skim past something important or did I just have a stroke? http://archive.wizards.com/Magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtgcom/daily/mr278 Follow up to http://archive.wizards.com/Magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtgcom/daily/mr11b And some more archetypes in this article: https://makeagameofthat.wordpress.com/2013/09/04/extended-player-psychographics/ edit: Vorthos is the guy who likes the lore or setting of the game as much or more than the game itself quote:Vorthos plays games to engage in Diegesis. Diegesis is a term that encompasses becoming swept up and involved in a fiction. Sometimes this is a designed fiction (the official lore) sometimes it’s Vorthos’ own fiction- constructed around the ‘official’ version. Like all the types in his subfamily, Vorthos’s interests are largely independent of the play of the game itself. Instead, he is interested in the aesthetics of the game on their own. He takes his time to stop and appreciate the scenery, even at the cost of efficient play. He roleplays characters or imagines himself in their position, becoming emotionally involved with the fiction. Where Timmy is interested in the narratives that he creates through his own play, Vorthos is interested in experiencing and exploring those that already exist within the game to their fullest. His own interactions with the game act primarily as a ritual to get him into the right frame of mind to immerse himself in ways that non-interactive media like film and books cannot achieve. At the deepest level of immersion he might experience events during a game from the perspective of a character within the fiction. Vorthos finds games that provide a compelling and thoughtful aesthetic meaningful. fozzy fosbourne fucked around with this message at 22:24 on Apr 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2015 22:20
|
|
|
From a few pages ago: What is a Megagame? That sounds awesome.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2015 22:44
|
|
|
Little Mac posted:From a few pages ago: What is a Megagame? That sounds awesome. This is a good intro.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2015 22:49
|
|
|
PerniciousKnid posted:Pax Porf is one of those games that sounds really intriguing but too complicated to ever get it out (my copy of High Frontier gathers dust). Anyone know of a good PP after action report or the like that demonstrates play? Let me know if you find something. I have Pax and Greenland's little intimidating boxes on my desk and am working up the courage to decommission a table for a while with one of them
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2015 22:54
|
|
|
What's the Magic archetype for the guy who likes to read Magic cards to figure out what they do but doesn't actually play? This is me, both literally with Magic and moreso than i would like with board games in general.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2015 23:34
|
|
|
Poopy Palpy posted:What's the Magic archetype for the guy who likes to read Magic cards to figure out what they do but doesn't actually play? This is me, both literally with Magic and moreso than i would like with board games in general. Maybe Melvin and Richie quote:Melvin plays games to understand how they work. For Melvin, everything can be broken down into smaller and smaller bits and then rebuilt to do interesting things. Melvin spends his time tinkering with programs or old cars- experimenting with changing rules, modding and so on. Through these activities, Melvin comes to appreciate how things fit together and what makes the gears spin and the wheels turn. The reward for Melvin is in often more in watching the machine in action than using it for its intended purpose, because to him the process itself is a thing of beauty far beyond whatever rewards success might yield. That’s not to say Melvin is entirely uninterested in the outcomes, but it’s more about testing his understanding of the mechanisms of the game than the victory-centric motivations of Timmy, Johnny and Spike. Melvin finds games that produce intricate, elegant interactions and actions meaningful. quote:Richie plays games to engage with culture. For Richie, a game isn’t just something to be taken on its own- games exist as part of a cultural fabric, interlinked with each other. Richie is in the truest sense the ‘meta-gamer’, who plays games to see how they relate to each other and discover the story they tell as a collective whole. Richie is attracted to games with cultural weight- award winners, genre definers and long histories. He enjoys being a part of this larger whole. His stories are full of anecdotes about how he met a famous player or how he has an original copy of this or that game. To Richie, context is everything. Richie finds games which allow him to experience connection to a larger culture meaningful. Also, Joel Eddy has a video review of Argent up https://www.boardgamegeek.com/video/67193/argent-consortium/drivethrureview-377-argent-imperium
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2015 23:40
|
|
|
I'm a Johnny Melvin Daria Petra Erdos, ask me about my pronouns
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 00:04
|
|
|
fozzy fosbourne posted:Maybe Melvin and Richie Ok, then in that case I am changing my choice to Melvin. How many of the dang archetype did they come up with? I think thats why I love Talisman and Arkham Horror so much. Not as games so much, but constructs. I just enjoy watching this great edifice of rules churn and turn over, like a deranged engine. Seeing how all the cards, and monster, and effects can interact with each other and create novel situations. I could care less about winning or the outcome of the game for any particular player. There is elegance in the emergence, like watching Conways Game of Life: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C2vgICfQawE
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 00:09
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:On the topic of making Magic decks, are there any good wargames or wargamelikes that use pre-battle army construction (other than miniatures)? You should check out Summoner Wars.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 00:20
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:On the topic of making Magic decks, are there any good wargames or wargamelikes that use pre-battle army construction (other than miniatures)? If it weren't for the no-minis clause I'd be recommending X-Wing so hard right now. Skirmish rather than war, but list building is a big thing in that game fozzy fosbourne fucked around with this message at 01:15 on Apr 7, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 00:23
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:I think thats why I love Talisman and Arkham Horror so much. Not as games so much, but constructs. I just enjoy watching this great edifice of rules churn and turn over, like a deranged engine. Seeing how all the cards, and monster, and effects can interact with each other and create novel situations. I could care less about winning or the outcome of the game for any particular player. There is elegance in the emergence, like watching Conways Game of Life: Yeah, pretty much this. They pretty obviously fail as interesting-choice-engines, but playing them with friends results in an evening of poo poo-talking and chatter that can be real enjoyable. I almost see them less as games and more as thematic social slot machines. That said, both of those two games turn into six-hour monsters way too easily. I wouldn't mind finding something with a complexity/investment level somewhere in the middle of Talisman/AH and Cards Against Humanity/Fluxx (which I think people find appealing for largely the same reasons, albeit with completely different presentation).
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 00:41
|
|
|
People are recommending bad games to a guy that likes bad games! You've gone too far this time, Vasel!
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 01:13
|
|
|
Okay do they have these in America? Specifically Atlanta, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 01:20
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:Ok, then in that case I am changing my choice to Melvin. How many of the dang archetype did they come up with? The Richie description comes from here, which lists 14 archetypes: quote:
I've never seen any but the first five referred to anywhere else, though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 01:27
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:Ok, then in that case I am changing my choice to Melvin. How many of the dang archetype did they come up with? *consults magic eightball* "All signs point to Timmy". Seriously, this sounds like the modern definition of Timmy from the second Mark Rosewater article: http://archive.wizards.com/Magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtgcom/daily/mr220b. Just got to keep owning it, dude quote:I wouldn't mind finding something with a complexity/investment level somewhere in the middle of Talisman/AH and Cards Against Humanity/Fluxx (which I think people find appealing for largely the same reasons, albeit with completely different presentation). Maybe I'll get a good games avatar for this, but I feel like the Commander/EDH format of Magic sort of slots right in here.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 01:31
|
|
|
Lottery of Babylon posted:The Richie description comes from here, which lists 14 archetypes: I would bet that that's because some guy who isn't Mark Rosewater came up with the others, I follow Magic really closely and I've never heard of them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 01:33
|
|
|
Elyv posted:I would bet that that's because some guy who isn't Mark Rosewater came up with the others, I follow Magic really closely and I've never heard of them. I searched for "timmy johnny spike melvin vorthos richie" without quotes. Google returned one hit for that article, one hit for a forum poll about that article, two hits for one-off forum posts defining Richie completely differently (Richie = rich = money), and then some non-gaming-related results like baseball players and a funeral home. I think maybe we've never heard of the other terms because literally one person in the world has ever used them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 01:41
|
|
|
Lottery of Babylon posted:I've never seen any but the first five referred to anywhere else, though. That's a kind of weird list. Bartle and Caillois are both pretty cool (personal nitpicks I have with them aside), and I can totally see some of their concepts being useful when added to the mix, but just taking their lists wholesale, giving them arbitrary names, and slapping them into the list of M:tG archetypes feels super super hacky. Actually, looking at that article, I guess that wasn't especially the intent. I guess I just feel like at that point the whole system of giving a human name to these archetypes becomes more confusing than helpful when the archetypes are working on differing axis. I have to say, though, the Caillois archetypes are actually super useful reference points for conversations about why people like "bad" games.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 01:44
|
|
|
Yeah, in the article, the guys states that he came up with Richie himself. The other non-Rosewater types are from some other spergin' on why people like games that has nothing to do with Magic, specifically.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 01:44
|
|
|
The whole Timmy/etc thing always rubbed me the wrong way, because it's basically a horoscope hidden behind Very Serious Language so now it's ok. Seriously, I've yet to meet someone as uncomplex as any of those breakdowns imply, and the entire appeal is finding "yours" using selective memory so you can be like "yeah I totally LOVES IMMERSION, it's cool when my friends and I roleplay our characters in Dead of Winter," while ignoring that you finely tuned your Weiss Schwarz deck after hundreds of hours of playtesting to win Regionals, and also that you basically don't say a word during your bi-weekly Pathfinder game and just sorta bleed into the background. When I'm playing video games I gravitate to characters who are big and control a lot of space with their abilities because I like the physical phenomenon of being really big and imposing (which I absolutely am not IRL), but I will absolutely toss that preference away if every character with those properties is trash garbage and I'd have to work 100x harder to win (assuming it's a PvP game). Weirder still, I'll be talking to my friends in mumble about how cool the lore of our particular faction, character, or class is, or how cool it is to see radical, progressive politics portrayed in some way, while also laughing at (again over voice with friends because I don't like to be rude) how bad our opponents are or how low the mage's DPS is. All of those are parts of my ~*~gamer persona~*~, and I strongly feel that everyone else is just as multifaceted unless they're being deliberately obtuse or actively trying to not have those dimensions, such as out of fear that they'll get laughed at for caring about their numbers in an MMO.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 01:45
|
|
|
Countblanc posted:The whole Timmy/etc thing always rubbed me the wrong way, because it's basically a horoscope hidden behind Very Serious Language so now it's ok. Seriously, I've yet to meet someone as uncomplex as any of those breakdowns imply, and the entire appeal is finding "yours" using selective memory so you can be like "yeah I totally LOVES IMMERSION, it's cool when my friends and I roleplay our characters in Dead of Winter," while ignoring that you finely tuned your Weiss Schwarz deck after hundreds of hours of playtesting to win Regionals, and also that you basically don't say a word during your bi-weekly Pathfinder game and just sorta bleed into the background. I think the past two pages and this post is the entire plot to Divergent.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 01:51
|
|
|
Yeah, there's also the matter of mood affecting what I want to play at any time. It *gasp* changes, frequently. Sometimes I'm interested in something competitive or try to master a game, other times I just want a diversion with literally no challenge, other times I want to slip into a trance, etc etc. In general people probably don't slot cleanly into any of those profiles. They might still be useful for classifying games though. Games are a bit more static and sometimes you need the right tool for the job; a negotiation game isn't going to offer me that trance like state of playing Hotline Miami while buzzed, Dixit isn't going to appeal to someone in the mood to Spike the gently caress out, I'm not going to come up with my own gimmick janky deck in Hearts like I might in a Magic draft, etc. E: basically, the original mark rosewater psychographic profiles were to describe why people play magic and to design a range of cards to appeal to those perceived reasons. that can change quite a bit for a particular person, but a card designed to appeal to spikes/johnnys/timmys is going to be pretty static (and some cards might do all three) fozzy fosbourne fucked around with this message at 02:07 on Apr 7, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 01:58
|
|
|
fozzy fosbourne posted:Yeah, in the article, the guys states that he came up with Richie himself. The other non-Rosewater types are from some other spergin' on why people like games that has nothing to do with Magic, specifically. Caillois is Roger Caillois, a French philosopher active during the 1950's who was probably the second big academic to seriously write about and examine games from a scholarly viewpoint. He can be pretty dry to read, but he's super cool and I totally recommend him to people. Bartle is Richard Bartle, who developed the first MUD and then went on to write a super influential thing on how social communities in MUDs form and the different types of players who inhabit them, I believe being the first to write a classification system for gamers based on observation of a single community (Caillois is super abstract). It's a pretty interesting work, but I feel like maybe it's been done better by later efforts--the whole Timmy/Johnny/Spike thing very much came into being as a response to Bartle and others' attempts at making these classification systems, and definitely feels way more useful/refined to me. But yeah, I'd say for sure that these all describe different reasons for enjoying things, not different people. It's useful for a designer to design "for a Spike", but meaningless (if maybe fun?) for a player to self-identify as one.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 02:01
|
|
|
Anyone here owns or has played Champions of the Galaxy?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 02:21
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:I'm just happy to be on the left wing of the spectrum I really enjoyed barbarian prince as far as those types of games go. First game I played I got left for dead by the traitor guard, and for killed by a bandit the next day irrc. It does have a little bit more to take account of than tales but I'm sure one could easily translate some stuff into cards. There's a really well done art revision floating around on bgg so I'd look for that if you're going to pnp
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 02:33
|
|
As far as the Magic scale, I am 100% Johnny. I'm often thinking about ways to tinker with a games rules before I even play it for the first time. I always made twice as many Magic decks as I ever played with, just for the fun of creating weird, unworkable, combo engines. I spend more time working on, and finding cool homebrew boardgame projects to make than I actually play
|
Countblanc posted:The whole Timmy/etc thing always rubbed me the wrong way, because it's basically a horoscope hidden behind Very Serious Language so now it's ok. Seriously, I've yet to meet someone as uncomplex as any of those breakdowns imply, and the entire appeal is finding "yours" using selective memory so you can be like "yeah I totally LOVES IMMERSION, it's cool when my friends and I roleplay our characters in Dead of Winter," while ignoring that you finely tuned your Weiss Schwarz deck after hundreds of hours of playtesting to win Regionals, and also that you basically don't say a word during your bi-weekly Pathfinder game and just sorta bleed into the background. The player labels aren't necessarily supposed to represent actual people, but different ways/reasons that people play the game. I doubt anyone who helped coin those terms are expecting you to identify as 'Spike 4 lyfe', they're just quick ways to refer to what aspects of the game the card/design is appealing to.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 04:18
|
|
|
What are some good medium Length games? I've got Coup, Skull and Love Letter and even Masquarade for Light Games. Like, these play at 15 minutes tops usually. And I've got stuff like Dungeon Petz and Argent and all sorts of others for 2 hour+ games. While I do have a bunch of card games like Netrunner or Conquest which can take up a half hour toan hour the fact that they're 1v1 only limits their playtime at Game Night. Soo, what're some good 'medium weight' games.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 04:19
|
|
|
AMooseDoesStuff posted:What are some good medium Length games? I am in complete love with Keyflower right now and once you have the rules down you can knock it out in 90-120 minutes with 4 people. I don't think there are many copies left out there but they're reprinting it. Others I have been enjoying in that range include: Castles of Burgundy, Concordia, Kemet, Chaos in the Old World, Hansa Teutonica, and Tzolk'in. Maybe Viticulture with a few of the modules from Tuscany? I would say most of these are in your upper range (right at 90-120 min). If you go down to 45-70 min you could do stuff like I dunno Istanbul, Village, Saint Petersburg, K2, Galaxy Trucker, or Last Will. Or some "classics" like Carc, TtR,  Dominion , 7 Wonders + exp (isn't it ubiquitous enough to be a classic at this point). Space Alert obv if you want a co-op.
T-Bone fucked around with this message at 04:57 on Apr 7, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 04:31
|
|
|
Definitely Mage Knight, it says 1 (to 4) hour(s) right there on the box!  Real answer, not sure if you're looking for any type of game in particular, but my friends have had good luck with Hanabi, Forbidden Desert, Tash Kalar, and Galaxy Trucker in that kind of 30 minutes to an hour play time range. We even got Agricola down to an hour not including set up after everyone became fairly familiar with it. Lilli fucked around with this message at 04:40 on Apr 7, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 04:37
|
|
|
If you have at least 6 people, Ladies and Gentlemen is wacky in a good way. I also like Spyrium but I think the previous two posters probably posted better games.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 04:42
|
|
|
Anyone play fantastiqa
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 04:43
|
|
|
Misandu posted:The player labels aren't necessarily supposed to represent actual people, but different ways/reasons that people play the game. I doubt anyone who helped coin those terms are expecting you to identify as 'Spike 4 lyfe', they're just quick ways to refer to what aspects of the game the card/design is appealing to. The problem is that people who are Bad At Games(tm) have latched on to this and sorta created a divide where they can hide behind the Timmy/Johnny persona as a shield to talk about people that they identify as Spikes (and there are a whole host of self-identified Spikes who stroke their Dunning-Kruger e-peens to sneer down at Timmies). It's incredibly creepy when you get right down to it because it reminds me of The Sneetches and we all know where that metaphor goes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 05:00
|
|
|
It's the same problems as GNS, and we sure as hell don't need any more of that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 05:08
|
|
|
Toshimo posted:The problem is that people who are Bad At Games(tm) have latched on to this and sorta created a divide where they can hide behind the Timmy/Johnny persona as a shield to talk about people that they identify as Spikes (and there are a whole host of self-identified Spikes who stroke their Dunning-Kruger e-peens to sneer down at Timmies). It's incredibly creepy when you get right down to it because it reminds me of The Sneetches and we all know where that metaphor goes. Sure but this happens all the time anyway. Hell this thread regularly has people come in and go on about the hive mind and how they're a special snowflake who can think for themselves because they disagree.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 05:14
|
|
|
T-Bone posted:I am in complete love with Keyflower right now and once you have the rules down you can knock it out in 90-120 minutes with 4 people. I don't think there are many copies left out there but they're reprinting it. I'm gonna toss out a quick caveat re: Kemet which is a game I really dig. Kemet is a medium-weight game, but it only becomes one once everyone playing it knows, say, what all the power tiles do and such. I don't think I've yet managed to play a game of Kemet that didn't run for 2+ hours, fun though they may have been.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 05:20
|
|
|
Bruceski posted:It's the same problems as GNS, and we sure as hell don't need any more of that. At least it's not Myers-Briggs.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 05:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 11:22 |
|
|
LIBRA (9/23 - 10/21) You know quite well how to win games -- but what really matters to you is whether you can build something unique in doing so. Melding into the backstory of the gameworld is ideal, but in the end, are you merely trying to escape from yourself? Beware of Capricorns and INTPs offering to play Munchkin.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 05:35
|
|