What GAME ARTICLES/REVIEWS are you WRITING?

There is supposed to be an expansion for it later this year.

I wrote an odd article on takebacks and under what circumstances I allow them:

Takebacks in boardgames: What I allow and why

I enjoyed that article on takebacks. My original gaming group jokingly called a takeback "the retroactive phase." Like you, we eventually settled on a standard involving no new information gained. In addition, I am very lenient about takebacks if someone is playing for the first time and didn't fully understand a rule. It is always tempting to allow a takeback in a co-op game, but I try to resist the temptation because takebacks can really unbalance a co-op game.

Shellhead wrote: I enjoyed that article on takebacks. My original gaming group jokingly called a takeback "the retroactive phase." Like you, we eventually settled on a standard involving no new information gained. In addition, I am very lenient about takebacks if someone is playing for the first time and didn't fully understand a rule. It is always tempting to allow a takeback in a co-op game, but I try to resist the temptation because takebacks can really unbalance a co-op game.

"No new information gained," is an awesome way to look at that.

That is exactly how it is written in the Mage Knight rulebook- no take back once new information is revealed. I feel like that should be SOP for pretty much any game.

www.polygon.com/platform/amp/22458363/cr...tter_impression=true

Charlest killing it with the no win situation consumers are in.

I agree with that article wholeheartedly. Also, as long as plans don't get changed on me*, I'm happy to say that Phantom Division will NOT be doing this. Base game only to start. Hopefully it does well, because I already have two expansions in my head.

* it's technically out of my hands, but that is the current plan

I'm ready as soon as it goes up, hotseat.

Charlie's article seems to have ruffled some feathers. www.reddit.com/r/boardgames/comments/nn1..._killing_board_game/

I expected as much. It's funny though because Twitter has been overwhelmingly positive, which surprised me.

I actually thought Redditors would mostly agree with the article as there's quite a bit of pushback against Kickstarter in that community. There's some strong words in opposition also on BGG but I'm refraining from engaging as it feels kind of wrong, almost like a designer stepping into a negative review to argue with a reviewer.

Really though, I wanted to start a discussion so it seems to have worked.

Always best to say nothing and let the work stand, imo.

While I don’t disagree with the ultimate thrust of the article on the weakness of the expansion in the Kickstarter era, I think you’re overstating their purpose before. I’m glad designers ten years ago had the time and space to create expansions that improved upon their initial work, some were planned from release to keep the game in the public eye. I believe Donald X. Vaccarino didn’t create new Dominion cards until Dark Ages, but Rio Grande wanted to drip the cards out. I remember people complaining about Days of Wonder releases because they felt only half the game was in the box and the rest was waiting in the expansion.

You presented the ideal expansion process, but it’s worth remembering that it was hardly the standard.

This is a slight sidebar but it fits well into this thread. I think hiring Tom to Shut Up and Sit Down has been good. I really like his work.

I agree your argument was a bit wonky regarding the point of expansions, but you are not wrong at all. And I think the reaction to your article on Reddit started a bit poor, but soon became very positive. You have almost a thousand upvotes which is huge given how few posters vote on articles they like!

To me the core of the issue is that games on Kickstarter are not bought on their qualities as games. They cannot be, because nobody has actually played them. And when you won't get them until one or two years later after the time of purchase, well, it's unavoidable, is it?

I also think it's impossible not to have a bit backlash if you point this out. Nobody wants to think they were duped into paying 300€ for a bad game they'll never play, even if it's true.

Had two reviews published today. The first is of Kolossal Games' Ruination, where I compare the evolution of Dudes on a Map style games to Glam Metal emerging from the New Wave of British Heavy Metal movement. playerelimination.com/2021/06/09/here-i-...-a-ruination-review/

Second review is of Uk'otoa, the first board game set in Critical Role's Exandria universe. I have a weird relationship with CR due to writing for Geek & Sundry for a few years, but this game intrigued me as it looked like it could be in that spiteful family weight category that Survive lives in. I love those types of games. I didn't love this one.
www.polygon.com/reviews/22526199/ukotoa-...le-board-game-review