Descent definitely totally not 3.0

I feel weird defending Tom, and I don't like pulling the thread back to the hows of reviewing, but he did note spending something like 10 to 15 hours with the game prior to the review, which--irrespective of whatever time he usually puts in--seems fair enough to me given that he's working from an advance copy of a new release. The review insights may not be profound, but it certainly seems to be coming from the perspective of someone who gave it a fair shake, all things considered.

Hey at least it's a fair guess that he was NOT paid for this one.

Tom Vasel turned his hobby into his job. I don't envy him.

First off I have that tie. I thought his video gave me the information I needed that wasn't available from FFG's website (which doesn't work in my current browser I have to use Edge to view their content, ugh). It seems he hits many of my likes and dislikes for this game.

Sagrilarus wrote: I skipped a fair amount of the video, but how does the app maintain its understanding of the state of the game? Or does it not need to?

The thing you have to note about all of FFG's "dungeon crawlers" is that they are a speed and optimization puzzle. They are not about hacking monsters to pieces. You are better off opening every chest but losing the mission than clearing the board of monsters every turn. Picking a character with low speed is playing hard mode (moreso than choosing hard mode). So the enemies have a list of actions in order. They take the first two they can comply with (one that doesn't change the board state is skipped). This can give you certain puzzle situations where you block line of sight and have the biggest bad guy have to move twice to get into range leaving him at the front. Very puzzle like, and I actually enjoy that aspect of it. From the preview it looks like that is condensed in this one (no list of orders), and I don't know if that is better or worse than the others. People have replicated the app with decks of cards.

I take the point about the app being a large portion of the cost. However to me it looks like they are going in the opposite direction of where I want them to go. I REALLY DON'T WANT to sit there and read a conversation between all the characters to my entire play group. I don't want a micromanagement mini-game of choosing between upgrading a dagger's pommel, the fletching of arrows, or the haft of a warhammer by depleting components. The "puzzle" is navigating the board and the monsters, I don't want a single player mini puzzle standing in the way of the group mega puzzles.

Michael Barnes wrote: This. Compare the DT review with NPI’s. In addition to not being presented by a smarmy shill, their preview (not a review, it was under embargo at the time) is full of thoughtful commentary and analysis about what works, what doesn’t, and what makes this a notable release. There’s also a real enthusiasm for the potential of the game instead of “I’m a review mill cranking out content”. I actually really like Efka and Elaine’s commentary - they are really sharp, and their analysis has a credibility far beyond anything that falls out of Vasel’s mouth.

Also, neither Efka or Elaine dress like Fozzie Bear.

Uh, WOW! What a difference. Ten minutes into the No Pun Intended review and there is so much more information, useful information, in there.

Years ago I read an article in some hipster music magazine where the journalist asked the heads of ten different labels what they thought about the state of the music industry. (“Is Napster changing EVERYTHING?!" for example.)

It was mostly forgettable fluff but the tenth guy they asked was Ian MacAye (Minor Threat, Fugazi, head of Discord) what he thought. His response was something along the lines of “I don’t even know how to answer that question. I don’t think I’m doing the same thing as those other guys, it’s like they’re playing football and I’m playing baseball.”

That is kind of how I feel regarding Vasel and his merry band. I don’t begrudge them success at all, but what they are doing is just completely perpendicular to my interaction with the hobby. I haven’t watched/listened to any of their stuff in years; they could stop tomorrow and I wouldn’t notice until it was mentioned here.

So I don’t get what the big deal is. If he’s encouraging bad habits among consumers, then (a) caveat fucking emptor, and (b) he’s a small fish compared to the entire edifice of crowdfunding, so I’m fine with solving that first.

jpat wrote: I feel weird defending Tom, and I don't like pulling the thread back to the hows of reviewing, but he did note spending something like 10 to 15 hours with the game prior to the review, which--irrespective of whatever time he usually puts in--seems fair enough to me given that he's working from an advance copy of a new release. The review insights may not be profound, but it certainly seems to be coming from the perspective of someone who gave it a fair shake, all things considered.

I think his overview of the game was useful, and I'm not saying he hasn't spend enough time on the game. I was simply surprised by the quality of his analysis. After 15 hours of play he should, in my opnion, be able to qualify his opinions. He didn't like assembling the terrain, but how did it look when playing, how easy was it to use during play, for instance. He liked combat, but why exactly? Did he have a lot of "it hinges on the roll af dice"-moments which were exciting? Was flipping cards something he liked because it had some puzzle qualities? Something like that. I haven't seen much of Tom's reviews, but I'm pretty sure I've seen him offer a better quality of analysis than this.

Returning to the game I get the feeling that we are maybe looking at it from the wrong perspective. Maybe, and I may be biased by the fact that I just preordered it for this reason, the game is not a game group game, but a family game. When I heard about the physical level differences I was thoroughfully unimpressed since I - much like Vasel - can easily imagine a staircase just from an illustration. But one of the reasons we remember HeroQuest and Siege of the Citadel from our gaming youth is precisely because of 3D features. And in the same vein I have no problem reading out dialogue because I'm going to play it with my kids and need to translate anyways. And while interacting with the app to write damage and choose targets seems a bit annoying, I think the lack of rules overhead it can give will be a benefit when playing with kids.

That being said I still don't get the "sell resources to buy stuff"-part of the app. I like the idea of gearing up and making simple choices, but managing how many herbs you want to keep and sell seems like an unnecessary level of micro management.

But that resource farming/crafting angle is 100% on point in terms of speaking to contemporary video game design- and thus to a generation of potential players who came up through Minecraft, Fortnite, Roblox, Breath of the Wild, Stardew
valley, et. Al.

I think it is important or look at this game from a different angle: it is not made for hardcore Descent 2.0 players, who are for some unfuckingknown reason clamoring for FFG to “reprint 2nd edition”, betraying an idiotic and atavistic fan mentality. This is an new, modern game for a new, moderne audience. It’s not for the middle aged men who proudly beat their chests about how they play board games to “get off a screen”. It’s a game for people who -expect- entertainment to be on a screen. Sorry Luddites. You lost.

It could very well be that the balance between the screen and the table isn’t there. Or it could be that this is the game that makes it not only viable, but essential.

The bottom line really is that what this game is offering could very well be something new, “next gen”...and to expect to do the same things dungeoncrawls and adventure board games have been doing for 40 fucking years is disingenuous.

Now, the trick is...does it succeed as -both- a board game and a video game?

Yeah, that's how it looks to me. This looks like a videogame-to-boardgame crossover, not the other way around. The app IS the game, the board parts are in support. And that's fine if it proves entertaining.

This genre has never gripped me personally, but I come with a thick, thick stripe of RPG lineage. And to a large extent both videogames and boardgames in the dungeon-crawl mold fall short for me because I don't get to make the character I want, just choose from the set. But that's a personal thing. As for making my own armor by gathering the parts and forging it . . . nah. Not my thing at all. I do that at work. I'll just play an RPG instead and focus on the parts of the adventure that interest me.

The melding of the two technologies has been overdue for a while now and there's been a couple of attempts. At some point, the app part is going to be able to read the board part and things will get more interesting. The technology is already there, what remains is for a good game designer to figure out how to make it rock.

Sagrilarus wrote: Y...
At some point, the app part is going to be able to read the board part and things will get more interesting. The technology is already there, what remains is for a good game designer to figure out how to make it rock.

Destinies by Lucky Duck Games had QR code scanning, now their latest KS Divinus scans and recognises icons in the game.

Looks like many of you dinosaurs and stuck-in-the-muds are getting it that this game is coming out to do something different/fresh to get new customers and maybe refresh older players:
- lowering the entry point with some housekeeping done in the app and combat intricacies (i.e. special abilities on all teh cards) simplified, plus 'fun' 3D scenery.
- narrative in the game, this has becoming very popular in boardgames of the past 3-5 years.
- crafting, again becoming popular/common on board and card games in the last few years.
- having a screen (shock - horror - gasp).
- better quality minis, as well as the massive interest shown in KSers shown for these I can remember many comments on this site over the last decade plus over 'bubblegum' miniatures .

I have the SciFi game of a three years back Sine Tempore and it has a narrative, some 3D scenery, and gathering resources for crafting upgrades in it so this is nothing new - maybe just new to a few of you guys and the type of games you still buy .

I know it may well cause many of you to choke severely but this could be a good seller for FFG ... although I still have reservations on the price, but with competitive discounting by US retailers it may not be that big of an issue in their main market.

Good points, the miniatures look to be the best board game miniatures yet. I think that is noteworthy and may justify a large chunk of the cost.

mads b. wrote: I think his overview of the game was useful, and I'm not saying he hasn't spend enough time on the game. I was simply surprised by the quality of his analysis. After 15 hours of play he should, in my opnion, be able to qualify his opinions. He didn't like assembling the terrain, but how did it look when playing, how easy was it to use during play, for instance. He liked combat, but why exactly? Did he have a lot of "it hinges on the roll af dice"-moments which were exciting? Was flipping cards something he liked because it had some puzzle qualities? Something like that. I haven't seen much of Tom's reviews, but I'm pretty sure I've seen him offer a better quality of analysis than this.

Now that I have watched his review as well as listened to the No Pun Included, the Dice Tower left out far too much pertinent information. Just a quick overview of the things he forgot to mention:
1) You don't play a single character the whole way through. In fact the game will provide upgrades for characters you are not using and you choose the character and loadout before each mission. Some character cannot be used until you unlock them in certain missions. This is a huge detail since it means there will not be expansions with new characters and thus new way to replay the campaign.
2) Every card is double-sided. Weapons and abilities also sleeve with other weapons. There is a large overhead to memorizing your loadout which will not be consistent (is bow side A or B active this mission?).
3) Enemies have resistances and weaknesses (this enemy takes double damage from a dagger) and now it seems you get an advantage to memorizing enemy weaknesses.
4) Yes the map will eventually move you onto the floor pushing out your character sheets.
5) The characters (remember it isn't your character anymore as you hot swap between missions, potentially causing conflict) will unlock abilities depending on dialog choices in between missions. This will not be transparent at all.

It seems like one rolled out of bed, turned on the camera, and just started free-forming. The other took some notes ahead of time and made sure to hit all the points that were noteworthy. I did have a problem with the NPI review as it was too uncritically gushing about the game. Like fan-boy levels of gushing. I think they picked out some negatives and said they were the best features in the world (since every card is double-double sided I kept forgetting what was on the other side of the card, it was an awesome surprise whenever I flipped one of my cards!!! How innovative!).

Back to the meat of the game. It really seems like it is trying to be a solo game. Loads of hidden information. Hot swappable characters. Stupid upgrade mini-game spending group resources. . . . . AND. . . . you also get this ridiculous amount of information that you need to know (oh wolves are weak to purple bows so I need to bring side B instead of pink side A, the upcoming mission will have us encounter rabbits so I need to equip the ruby pommel, last time Mike had Sparky choose the selfish dialog choice so I can't pick the defend the troops dialog option or I'll get the weaker unlock, etc.). Now the funny thing is NPI played this off as an extreme positive (hey that choice I made about the ruby pommel three weeks ago paid off because I hit a rabbit with the sword side of my weapon instead of my bow side, I forgot about that, isn't that totally awesome!). With all the hidden information it seems like a Min-Maxer's worst nightmare, which is odd for a puzzle game. I suspect that normal difficulty is frustratingly easy.

I'll probably sit this one out a year, see if they provide expansions, and pick it up when I move back home permanently next summer.

mtagge wrote: I did have a problem with the NPI review as it was too uncritically gushing about the game. Like fan-boy levels of gushing. I think they picked out some negatives and said they were the best features in the world (since every card is double-double sided I kept forgetting what was on the other side of the card, it was an awesome surprise whenever I flipped one of my cards!!! How innovative!).

NPI is super positive in their review but they also confirmed that this game is unlikely to be for me. I might have considered it for solo play but "too easy" is the death knell of a solo game. It sounds like a great game for people playing with kids.