Anti-Barnes Gaming

SuperflyTNT wrote: Weeks loves chaos. There's a news flash!

Then he should work for the post office! *DUCK!* (wait, that's Rliyen's line...)

daveroswell wrote:

SuperflyTNT wrote: Weeks loves chaos. There's a news flash!

Then he should work for the post office! *DUCK!* (wait, that's Rliyen's line...)

BA DUM TISH!

Next up in the Anti-Barnes gaming lab is probably the most controversial game, Ticket to Ride.
Last night I played a 4 player game with 3 players who had never heard of the game. It is my sad duty to report that the game went over very well with everyone.

Two of the new players come from a traditional Monopoly boardgame background and they loved the game.

Maybe it was the fact that the game was new, a "novelty effect" so to speak. None of the players indictated they wanted to buy a copy but they did ask to play again. The game is no "10" but it is also no "1" either. I would say it would be a solid "7" in all seriousness while I surpress a Schloeserian type smile.

Revealing the results of my session of Ticket to Ride are a little painful. On the one hand I revel in proving Barnes wrong but on the other hand I am forced to give kudos to one Alan "Gathering of Friends" Moon. Moon and his anal convention have been the target of much lampooning by me but I cannot deny Moon has a good game in Ticket to Ride. It is no smash sensation that BGG and their sandal clad minions in white socks make it out to be but it is certainly a good game. Perhaps Alan was just plain lucky or maybe he was visited by a muse one night while listening to Vivaldi and was inspired just long enough before he kicked the muse out because he was wearing a fake Red Gathering of Friends badge.

In my opinion, Barnes' "1" rating of Ticket to Ride has been a prevailing reason for many people not taking him seriously as a game reviewer. If he really feels this way, it is clear to me he does not play with a wide variety of gamers or at least not many new ones. I suspect he always games with the same crowd and shuts other gamers out in disgust or for the sake of punk rebellion.

I really think that Barnes low rating of Ticket to Ride has to do more with a contrarian for the sake of being contrary attitude much like Tom Chick's "C" rating of HALO REACH in the video game world.

I was playing last night with a non English speaking player and found that Ticket to Ride was perfect for the player. It made me think how brilliant it is to design a game where the components have little or no English text. If it is a hit you will sell many more copies. Only the rules need translating.

The test last night proved, at least to me that Ticket to Ride, is no "1", proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. I reccomend Barnes revise his rating with a notorized written apology to Alan Moon.

I still love me some TTR and always have. Out of my first (and thankfully only) BGG-kool aid induced purchase this is almost the only game I still have. Long since have I sold Alhambra and its ilk. I don't have access to lots of "hardcore" gamers and so this goes over great with my family and friends. Would I choose it over TI3 if I was in a hardcore crowd? Of course not. But it fits in my collection and besides - I like rummy and geography (and pretty colors?).

I stand by the 1 rating. Ticket to Ride is just about as bland, vanilla, dispassionate, and uninspired as a hobby game can get. The gameplay is just tepid and watered-down enough for folks to slip into a sort of dull appreciation for it because it just doesn't offer any kind of resistance. I'm all for accessible, simply fun to play games but there's about a hundred you could choose over TTR.

That being said, it probably has held up over the years better than stuff like Alhambra, but I still hate it.

I'm all for accessible, simply fun to play games but there's about a hundred you could choose over TTR.

100 games? I haven't read this much hyperbole since I read Ken Bradford's review of Trashfest!

This is a list I would like to see! You might get 10 to 20 games but not 100?

Barnes: By your own description, the 1 rating is utter crap.

You really are just rating it a 1 to be contrary. From your description, it would get a 4 or 5. That leaves the 1 and the 2 for games that are actively truly awful. And I bet it stems more from dealing with the people who want to play TTR again and again, and rave about it virtues and...

But that's the fanbase and not the game. If THAT were true, Space Hulk would probably really get a 1 as well.

Alan isn't the most creative author out there, but his designs are well developed. It does work as a very light and simple game, and has ideas and a complexity that more resemble classic German games. Luck of the draw is quite strong in the game (atypical from the modern Euro), and the game encourages quite direct interaction if the players desire it. (That said--it requires a full table for the limited space and cruelty aspects to be in play.) And yet it is a game that does require some skill to play (not a lot, but some).

Very much in the same mindset as Thurm & Taxis. And both are rather better than Carcassonne. And NO ONE hates on Carcassonne enough.

What do you expect? He likes Ra.

Barnes: By your own description, the 1 rating is utter crap.

You really are just rating it a 1 to be contrary.

Branham has spoken! I consider his agreement with me a badge of honor!

1 is nuts. i hate that game with a passion and even I know it's a 4 at worst

moofrank wrote: Very much in the same mindset as Thurm & Taxis. And both are rather better than Carcassonne. And NO ONE hates on Carcassonne enough.

Au contraire, I fuckinghate Carcassone. With a passion. For the life of me I just don't get the attraction..

Carcassonne is a fun puzzle game, and it's the original worker placement scheme. It's fun with a bunch of the more hostile expansions and it's great to play when you're more focused on conversation and hanging out than hunkering down over a game.

As for the 1 rating, we're kind of splitting hairs here and getting into that space where 1-10 ratings are wholly arbitrary and rather meaningless when we're trying to define what the difference between a 1, a 4, and a 7 are. I like binary ratings- all or nothing. Ticket to Ride would get the nothing rating, because I do not like it at all. There's nothing in it for me.

Alan Moon's games are well-developed, they most definitely are. But they're also lifeless,with a clinical coldness that no amount of cute artwork, wooden elf boots, or Days of Wonder production can hide. Looking at his ludography, there's _nothing_ of his that like, Union Pacific would be the closest to anything I'd care to play. I haven't played Isla Dorada or Good Dog, Carl: The Game so I can't say either way on those.

It is a mistake to rate Thurn and Taxis higher than TTR, I'll give you that. Thurn is one of the worst games I've ever played, utter garbage.

I wouldn't rate TTR a 1, and I really don't like it. I'd rather play TTR than Carcassonne, though.

However, I fully support Barnes' right to rate in anger. "Even my Labrador is a gamer now, and I thank Ticket to Ride!"

(by the way, why are we arguing about the rating system on another site?)

Barnes is correct about the "clinical coldness" of Alan Moon's games. However, this is not really a bad thing especially if you are gaming with the likes of Loder or Ken Bradford. The last thing you want is a "warm and fuzzy" game. HA!

My favorite Alan Moon game is an underated gem in my collection, Capitol. A building game with no soul but I find it enjoyable. The games I play are always close with tense decisions. If you are not familiar with this game I refer you to a Tom Vasel review written before he went "Hollywood"

www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/20601/user-review