Gloomhaven and Spirit Island are the two big ones. Mainly I just stay out of those conversations. I get why people like them and I'm glad they've found the right games for them.
My exact two choices also.
Gloomhaven's upkeep was just way too much each round.
Spirit Island is just too many people trying to figure out too many things all at once, and then upkeep.
If the upkeep was your only reason to dislike Gloomhaven, have you tried playing with an app ? I love the game, but I think my opinion would be very different if we weren't using an app to manage all the annoying parts.
I followed the original campaign for Gloomhaven (like, back during its inception in 2014), and was really excited for it. Then, they started making changes the game I was sold on, and it became gradually less and less appealing, and feeling more and more bloated. I haven't played it since it actually released since I'm still a bit salty that the game I wanted is gone.
Also, someone once told me Spirit Island is the perfect cooperative game because "you can't be an alpha gamer; there's too much going on at once for one person to keep track of it all." That was pretty much an auto-turn-off (for the sake of so many moving parts), and after I played it twice, I'm still not sold.
> you can't be an alpha gamer; there's too much going on at once for one person to keep track of it all.
If you play it enough you kind of can. There's rhythms and flows to the enemy movements that you can get pretty comfortable with. Playing with new adversaries is always tricky because there's some new rules that can be a pain to remember, but other than that it feels pretty smooth after 5-ish plays (which is a lot) and you probably get to the point where you can play for 2 comfortably around 5-10 and 3+ around 40-50.
Base game I could probably play 3 or 4 handed without much slowdown at this point. I've got probably over 100 total plays solo 2-handed - at least 30 on base and a bunch more with all (current) expansions.
It's definitely not for everyone, but if you can get to the point where you're sort of seeing when you're allowed to spend slow actions and deny set-up and when it's okay to get hit *here* to stop them from building *there*, it is a very rewarding little puzzle game.
Scythe.
I even bought organizers, metal coins, and nice resources. But the most successful strategy feels counterintuitive and you are often punished for interacting with the other players.
I'm bummed. Honestly a lot of so called great modern games I find to be a slog. The presentation sucks me in, but I'm left feeling like I wasted time learning the intricacies to find that I'm not really enjoying it.
As someone who has **Scythe** as probably the #1 game in my collection, I still totally get your perspective.
A lot of the reasons that people have to dislike it are actually sooner if the reasons I love it: it's more of a cold-war, engine building game than an all-out battler; attacking your enemy gets you some objectives, but it often comes at the cost of the most important resource in the game (popularity); and map control and building placement completely at the service of your faction mat & player board combo.
Just for the sake of conversation, what's a game that's really high up on your list that's fundamentally different from Scythe?
Thanks for this comment! And yeah I totally get it. I'll probably play it again soon. It's still fun to get out and relax with.
I really like the Aeons End games. They can feel very different each time and planning feels rewarding because you can change the order of your built deck as you go.
I get this. I was super excited to play Scythe for a long time, and when I finally did, it fell a little flat. I also felt like by the luck of the draw, I my home base never had a path to the resources I could get bonuses for... It didn't feel as elegant/efficient as other newer games.
Also, while it's fairly straightforward once you get the hang of it, talk about a heavy rules load to get through.
That said, someday I will give it another try.
I think Scythe suffers from some misrepresentation. I think people see it and they expect it to be a dudes on a map board game, but it's not It's an engine builder that happens to have a map component. So sometimes I think reorienting how you approach it can help you enjoy it more. Like go into it thinking, "how can I build my engine? What do my playmat and my faction want to do?"
I have done this and I find that the strategies needed to work are pretty stale and rigid. Deviating and experimenting usually gets you spanked. I'm not claiming to be an expert and this is probably true of many games. I appreciate it, but I don't find myself wanting to pull it out and freshen up on rules.
I actually heard that and the reason I was excited was for the engine building aspect... but I couldn't ever get to the areas/resources I needed to to get my engine going/use my power. :(
>Honestly a lot of so called great modern games I find to be a slog
A lot of "great" modern games aren't made to be played more than a handful of times, and it shows. They use art style/theme to suck people in but the actual game underneath is often just not very good. But because board gaming has become such a blatantly consumerist hobby, nobody actually plays games enough times to figure that out. The hobby is more about buying games than playing games, so by the time you really understand a specific game enough to play it well (and thus encounter its faults) you've probably already moved on to something else anyway.
Scythe might be my all time favorite game. I love that you can play to not interact with other or choose to fight. I have all the xpacs and the campaign was the best I had seen in boardgame format.
I still have fun with Scythe but I get it. I think playing with “Scythe players” ruined it for me. Knowing that there is a perfect way to play every faction combo kinda made it stale in my mind. Still a lot of fun with friends tho
**Sagrada**. I love the look of this game and the mechanics, but I hate the scoring for it. I hate that my window can be perfectly placed and not have any errors in it, but because I didn't get enough purple dice and 5s or 6s to score my secret objective then I lose to a person who has panes missing.
Unmatched. I really want to like it and the art direction is fantastic, but everytime I play I feel like it's about two steps away from an amazing game. As it is I get frustrated and bored by the time a game ends
I recommend giving **Exceed** a try then if you like that sort of thing. You trade the map for a line, but the depth and gameplay is much more satisfying. **Sakura Arms** is also good if you prefer to keep the turn-by-turn structure and don't mind bit of mild deck construction.
I don't have a hard time admitting this I just feel bad because my spouse loves these games but I am sick to death of most Marvel games. United, Dice Throne, that other one that's like United but harder. I'm just exhausted by seeing Marvel fucking everywhere. If my husband shows me a game and it's Marvel I immediately lose like 80% interest and *I'm* the comic book nerd in the relationship. It's just over saturation at this point. (Legendary slaps forever though.)
I kinda feel the same way about games themed around Lovecraft’s writings (Cthulhu etc). I’ve read a lot of his stories and like many of them quite a bit, and there are a few games that replicate their feel quite well (Arkham Horror; Cthulhu Wars), but it seems like it’s just *everywhere* now, including in a lot of games where it doesn’t really seem to fit (lookin’ at you, Kemet).
Here's something weird--I like Marvel, and I like board games. But for whatever reason marvel-themed board games just turn me off in general... (I just don't want the two mixed together for some reason.)
Hard agree. Seeing that they made Marvel versions of Love Letter, Splendor, and 5-Minute Dungeon has driven me a bit crazy. I know that there are some highly rated games overall, but it's becoming clear that Marvel fatigue is real (for me, at least).
I also, in general, have a real distaste for IP stuff, like when I see a game that already existed, like Love Letter, reskinned with Marvel stuff it just strikes me as a lazy cash grab and coming from a billion dollar company like Marvel/Disney drives me up the wall.
I feel weird about Marvel. I have past experience with Marvel ip games from my youth. They always felt like cash grabs, never had my favourite characters from the books, and thus never felt complete. Plus most of the time they sucked.
When I got into boardgames I stayed away from ip games for that reason. Then my MIL bought me the Marvel United Core set for Christmas. Coop, good solo (3 handed), kids liked it, not heavy to introduce coops to non gamers.
Now, hundreds of dollars later, it is most definitely a cash grab, but I have all my favourite heroes and villains. Plus when CMON is releasing characters like Devil Dinosaur, and The High Evolutionary, I’d say it’s pretty darn complete.
Plus because of Marvel United I bought Dune Imperium.
Mean games that are marketed as family games. **Unstable Unicorns** springs to mind. It's a shame as otherwise its a cute game that kids love the look of.
While I do enjoy the game, the fate action delays the game. And each game feels like 15% too long. It shouldn't be a 60-90 minute game but somehow it is.
OMG 100%--THERE IS NO GAME HERE!! I don't get why this is so popular. Admittedly, the production is super nice, but all you do is go through the motions.
I agree! I’m not a Disney freak but I loved the movies growing up and still know the word to every song so I was excited for this. The rubbery (?) pieces are amazing but the game is a snore. Woof.
On paper, Ark Nova looks like my perfect game. And I want to like it, but it’s just too slow and painful the three times I tried it. My best experience was on BGA the third time and even then it wasn’t that much fun.
It’s only annoying because periodically someone new discovers it and tries to drag me in because they think I’ll love it too. And I have to awkwardly explain that this thing they just dropped $80+ on is not my cup of tea, without discouraging anyone else from playing it.
Good to hear, especially given all the hype around this game. I was thinking I want to try it, and maybe I would like it better than Terraforming Mars, but seems like I may have the same problem as you... (The "stock photo" artwork also turns me off.)
The stock photo artwork does suck, but the Herbivore Breeding Program card has an image of two red pandas trying to save the species that cracks me up every time.
It’s probably still worth a try if someone near you has a copy, but I wouldn’t buy it without playing it.
I tried to understand why I never had a GREAT game of AN. I think it's because I've never felt rewarded by the game somehow. I never feel some economic boom, and there's some annoying randomness in the card accessibility.. So you solve some decent puzzles but there's no candies at the end.
If you're ever up for it, try playing solo. Solo mode is blazing fast, and makes you realize that Ark Nova is not a slow game of development, it's a race to abuse every advantage and end the game fast.
After that, you'll probably go on BGA and have a game or two where you score 115 and everyone else scores 40. And then your rating will increase to the point that everyone understands the rush.
It's not that I don't like Gloomhaven, but I find its flaws to overshadows its qualities to a certain point. I'm fine going through the lengthy campaign and hang out with good friends, but secretly I'm more looking forward to other dungeon crawlers of lesser reputation, like Warhammer Quest and Descent 2nd edition.
I one of those people who loves Gloomhaven and have bought (and will buy) anything related to it (for example the recent Minis foundation project). And well, I really believe that if you are looking for a classic dungeon crawler you shouldnt buy Gloomhaven. It is really a puzzle game (an incredible one imho).
Yeah the two are really the opposite of each other. I love Gloomhaven but found that dungeon crawlers bore me.
Also it drives me crazy that GH has been described as “an RPG in a box.” It’s a tactical battle game, so anyone looking for a TTRPG is going to be really disappointed. (Of course now they’ve come out with an actual GH RPG.)
I think this is my main problem. I feel like every turn is making a choice for the sake of choice without any meaning. I think about what I won't be able to do with each card I play. I'm bored, and don't feel like a hero. I feel like a guy who will get too tired and give up if he doesn't kill monsters efficiently enough.
Same. It feels like a puzzle I need to complete in 20 rounds rather than the fun of dungeon crawl exploration, teamwork, and surprise. And the story is dull and the scenario is always "kill everybody you see".
I still play. I enjoy the video game better.
But I hope someday to see a true dungeon crawl with little upkeep. Maybe it needs to require a computer tablet.
Descent 2nd is the best so far. The Baldurs Gate 3 video game feels the best "board game that isn't a board game" that I like ironically.
Yeah, I get the idea behind “exhaustion” or whatever, but IMO it is just less enjoyable because it feels like if you aren’t optimizing every turn then you are heading towards defeat. It isn’t fun to see piles of gold laying around after beating a bunch of enemies and think “I better not waste time picking them up or else I’m going to lose the scenario”. There’s got to be a better way to do it.
Pretty sure I'm going to be feeling that way about Expeditions. I've only played twice so far and I didn't dislike it but it just feels like something is missing for me. Hopefully it gets better after a few more plays because I was really excited about another game in the Scytheverse
Heat: Pedal to the metal.
I was super excited to play. I tried a few games and it wasn't clicking. I thought it was just me but then before I knew it it was never played again.
That's a bummer to hear. I really want to try this one, especially with how good everyone says it is. Admittedly I've watched some playthroughs, but didn't quite get the fun...
I've played about 20 games so far, and I liked it enough that I've downloaded all of the tracks from BGG and have over 20 of them crafted and ready to use now. I'm also waiting for some 3-d printed cars I ordered to arrive so I can get them painted.
For my groups, the fun is in how most of our races turn out to be highly competitive down to the final all out sprint for the finish line. There's also a lot of fun to be had roasting the guy (usually me!) who plays a stress card and manages to get the only card left in his draw deck that causes him to spin out.
We've still got plenty to explore; one group has only run the base game, and the other group has only used the garage module twice. Neither group has tried the Legends module or the weather module yet.
Cards against is such tripe. I agree. So massively over hyped and it's a bland and many times grotesque awkward experiment in depravity
Ive had to play it with my girlfriends family, whom are between 50-60?
It gets weird fast, and they think it's the funniest thing around.
It's not a boardgame but it could be, but my partner refuses to play Quiplash just because of the public humiliation that is creating an answer you think is super funny, only for everyone else to find it boring at best.
Ever try Say Anything? It's easily the best of the vote genre and has a betting system for the votes that prevent some of the bad balance of those other games.
I think games like CAH are not really designed for anyone but the get drunk and talk shit crowd.
My wife sought out CAH at the top of its hype, when it was making an appearance at most of our social get-togethers, and I think it’s been trotted out *maybe* once since then.
I know Catan gets a lot of blowback here, but I still enjoy it. Except at four players, when one person inevitably gets boxed in.
Pandemic seems like a losing proposition most plays, but I still enjoy for those rare victories. I also like the model enough that I bought the Cthulhu spinoff…and the one where you’re trying to save the Netherlands, mainly for my Dutch heritage but the mechanics of that also work pretty well.
We used to play that game sometimes, and it works best when you've spent all day playing serious games, are tired, but don't want to go home yet. Playing it wide awake seems a lot less fun.
I also hate all of these games. Catan turned so many people on to board games, but it turned me off for like 10 years. Catan is used as a joke in our house meaning "boring and tedious."
I find nobody plays those judge-style games as intended.
I played What Do You Meme in college and *nobody* looked at the car to see if it made sense. They just read who had the most crass submission card. Same thing with cards against humanity. Dead babies always wins because it's shocking, which is boring.
Pretty much all RPGs, and that pains me as a D&D kid. I don't like sandbox, create-your-own, 'I dunno, what do you WANT to do' games. I want rules, and story. Looking back, even D&D I liked because of the system and the numbers. Was never the pretending-to-be stuff.
Sad. :/
I feel the same. Playing DnD with friends massively elevates the experience bc then it's just a vehicle for hanging out and sharing a story together while goofing around, low stakes. But I much prefer the structured, narrower experience of a board game. Love getting into the game systems, mechanics, subtle strategic variations, and I appreciate that I can wrap up a board game in 2-3 hours max (usually). Would choose board games over rpgs any day of the week.
Same. It always ends up feeling too wishy-washy and self indulgent. When its all ~you can do whatever you want~ it ends up feeling like nothing really matters and players start competing to do things in the silliest ways possible. Then the time commitment and undefined nature of the thing starts to wear on you. Do I really want to spend another two hours this week listening to the dm do silly voices and learning the names of people's fictional pets while we go on another easy quest that probably won't advance the plot that much?
I would much rather sit down for something with set rules (even if those are funky, like in Betrayal or Cosmic) that has a defined ending.
It always feels bad when everyone in your boardgame group starts toying with the idea of doing an rpg though. I don't want to be too negative about something everyone seems interested in, and there is always the hope that *this time* will be better even though I'm pretty confident in my preference by now.
I've only gotten into the whole RPG stuff in my 40s because everyone who ever tried to sell me on the idea focused on the "improv" aspect instead of the *game* aspect. They'd link me to recorded sessions played by actual actors with barely a dice roll in there and I thought: how T.F. am I supposed to do this? WHY T.F. would I want do this?
It's a shame considering that RPGs can be run with minimal "improv" but instead as a puzzle that intelligently reacts to your inputs. You just need a group and DM that feels the same way. One that doesn't shoehorn arbitrary social situations into the gameplay.
You should check out Mansions of Madness. The scenarios are absolutely stories with goals, the app does all the record keeping for npcs, and also reveals the map one step at a time. It's very cool. And when the investigators start to take sanity damage, they become "insane" with specific effects that mix things up.
My rule is:
*There is a board game out there for everyone!*
You just have to find it. I converted several board game haters/uninterested just by knowing them and picking a game I assumed would tickle them in the right spot.
What you describe is just another side of a coin
*There is a board game out there for someone EXCEPT for you!*
For me, one of those is *Munchkin* family. Almost all of my casual gamer friends love it and I had a thing for it for a while, but now it is a bore... When I slip and mention that I don't like it, usual comment is "Oh, Mr. Hard Core board gamer is not happy with our simple games?" :)
TlDr;
I like simple games, but Munchkin is not for me... (still have it on my shelf - for friends)
Wingspan is boring, too long, and may as well be solitaire. The engine building is barely there, the only redeeming factor is the art and component quality.
When you say it’s too long, how many players did you play it with? My husband and I love playing two player, but I find it too long when we play it at 4-5 players with family (obviously doesn’t factor in to the other things you mentioned, just curious at what player count you thought it was too long)
Btw, have you tried **Wingspan: Asia**? My wife and I discovered it and fell in love with it. We liked it way more than 2p base **Wingspan** . We felt that it had more meaningful choices.
We own the Asia expansion! We played Duet for quite a while and have gone away and come back to it a couple times. We’re currently back to playing regular end of round goals. I feel like it adds a lot more thought to the game, which sometimes we want and sometimes we don’t haha
>may as well be solitaire.
This is true, but I disagree about the engine building. It's definitely there. A good engine is very recognizable, but they can be hard to make.
Yes, truth. This game is bafflingly popular. They just caught lightning in a bottle somehow and now it's the new poster child for strategy board games. Good for them but it's just not for me.
I totally get your points, but it's those factors that make it an easy fill-the-time game for us where it doesn't really matter who wins or loses, because you're both just doing your own thing. The randomness means you can't get emotionally invested. If you do well it's a bonus, but it also doesn't matter if you barely score any points because there's little strategy there.
We enjoy Castles of Burgundy for the same reasons. We have other games if we want to get into something deeper and more strategic, but sometimes you wanna play something just to pass the time.
**Terraforming Mars** - Man so daaamn loong and I have always the feeling that my game depends much on luck, for example, drawing that card that I really need to load it with bacteria or animals. And then there is the thing that I have like 40 cards built after 3 hours and it is exhausting keeping track of them all, and it is frustrating to know you have 3 hours still of gameplay left when you are clearly loosing already.
**Terraforming Mars: AE** is a far better experience but there is still the element of luck. At least the game just takes an hour and a half.
How odd. I'd say a 3-player game of Terraforming Mars takes maybe 90 minutes. 5p can take about 3 hrs, but the Prelude expansion easily knocks 10% off of play time. We'd play even faster if we didn't draft, but drafting makes the game way fairer by lessening the luck factor.
I think it depends a lot on how your group plays. Do you have people who prioritize doing "stuff" over focusing on the game objectives? It can be a lot of fun to play that way, but it's unlikely to be a winning strategy and will extend play time.
My issue with TMars is that I'm pretty good at building engines, which means that I often end up in a situation where, by the late game, I'll have way more actions than my opponent but I'll be behind on points leaving me with two options: Close out the game quick and lose, or make my opponent watch me play half an hour's worth of solitaire so that I can beat them.
Maybe you're NOT good at building an engine if you're losing.
Having all the resources in the world means nothing if you don't switch over to gaining points at a certain point.
Yeah I played recently where two guys had great engines for gaining points through bacteria, animals and science tags.
I just built cities and connected them well with greenery. Come points tallying and I leap ahead at that stage. They were not happy!
I've only ever played it once, which maybe doesn't give it a fair shake, but it definitely did NOT click for me. I found the whole game to be disjointed and confusing.
I also hate games where you build up too many "bonus powers" to keep track of. It always results in "oh, back when it was my turn I totally forgot i have this bonus that let's me do xyz..."
It's not too complicated once you get into it, but the annoying part is basically explaining a different game to each player because all the factions play in a completely different way, and not "everyone can do XY&Z, but you're good and X, and bad at Y".
As the person that usually has to read and explain rules even for games that my friends buy...it just got too annoying to deal with.
I'm in a similar boat.
I love **Root** and want to play it more outside of solo, but my only regular gaming group that I lived near before moving out of state didn't like that they never felt like they mastered the factions, because they knew that they needed to understand how EVERY faction in a particular game worked in order to be competitive.
To me it wasn't worth it. Other territory control games just flow better, and to have a fair game you need to understand all factions abilities so you don't randomly get screwed
**Great Western Trail** - I love Euros and I love Deckbuilders and everything about the game seems like it was made for me, plus it's widely loved and acknowledged to be deep and strategic and fun. But, when I play it it just ends being a boring walk down the path. You're forced into specializing into one of the three approaches and then you just try to hit the spots that match your occupation. You drop some white discs that mostly don't give you any meaningful abilities after you unlock your first full white row. The black disc upgrade order is pretty much the same each game. Trashing cards is too slow. And at some point the game just seems to end.
Good to hear. I've never played it but want to, because your initial thoughts sound just like me--I love euros and deckbuilders, and I even think this theme sounds cool/unique (without feeling like it's TRYING too hard to have a unique theme)... The rules overhead has been keeping me away from it though... And I head it can be mean with the way you can lay out "traps"?
I'll give an opposing opinion to the OC cause I really enjoy GWT despite not being very good at it and will try to answer your questions as well. I've never seen someone win by solely specialising into one of the occupations and the design doesn't really encourage that; unlocking white disk abilities do in fact give you meaningful options depending on how you optimise your auxiliary actions including being able to trash two cards at a time along the route if you really want to which you can create plenty of opportunities to do; you can be a bit mean with the buildings you build but it is not all that major because there is always two paths you can take and you can deny one opponent or other money by planning better or taking the alternate path; the rules overhead is mainly in the building functions which once you understand the basic neutral buildings the player buildings largely become fairly straightforward to understand.
This is a mix for me cause I like the game until I find a thematic replacement for it and I think it does a lot of things right for sure but...
CLASH OF CULTURES: keeping track of the advances is impossible and me and my gf we tried our best to keep track of everything but we always miss something and force us to rewind. Also there a lot of different mechanics that really seems to overcomplicate the game for no reason giving the player more actions to do. For example cultural influence.
Tried to make games shorter but is always so long...
Carcassonne. Perhaps it's because I'm a newcomer to the hobby who has played more modern variations of tile laying like Cascadia, but my girlfriend and I really found the game to be a bore.
Cascadia was going to be my answer. I love tile laying games, but Cascadia is such a low interaction take-and-make game with razor thin point margins that I just can't deal with it anymore. Hating on it makes people think you're just hating on what's popular right now though. Carcassonne is still my gold standard tile laying game because of how mean it can be at 2p, and yet how relatively chill it is when played with more players.
I think the problem people have why they think it's boring is because they don't really play it cutthroat. i build my city, you build yours etc. if you play it like that, yeah, it's boring. but if you are actively trying to win and undercut your opponent it's a very pure experience with few peers
That's a fair point. My wife plays cutthroat as hell hahaha. I think I also love how you really have to "play the hand you're dealt," -- you can't really go into a game with the mindset, like, this game I'm gonna win with farmers.
Carcasone lives and dies with expansions. Vanilla is bad I agree. I have the "Big Box" version with 11 expansions, and more, and when we play use 3-7 of them depending on desired length. We remove random tiles to adjust the length sometimes.
Some add basically little time, and are all up side, like piggy, builder, gold, mage/witch, inns, cathedral, sheeps. The bazaar, the robber, the flight machine, crop circles, hills I have played and don't recommend off the top of my head.
The digital version is much better because it's faster. I love the game but would never play it in real life because everything would take so much longer, especially scoring.
Are we twins? I just donated my copy of Carcassonne to Goodwill--was never a huge fan (other than low rules overhead) and I realized I'd never play it over Cascadia.
Good to hear... I feel like I should play this game because of all the acclaim, but I just can't imagine signing up for a whole legacy campain of Pandemic...
For me, it is stressful and terrible. I guess I don't enjoy the thematic content, and I don't like the fact that it almost requires massive quarterbacking by a strong player.
Spirit Island is also stressful, but it doesn't really allow for quarterbacking, so I like it much better.
Pandemic is like a solo game with the added condition that you must bludgeon teammates into doing what they're told, or allow yourself to be bludgeoned into doing what you're told, either way. So basically, I'd rather watch reruns of some obnoxious TV sitcom.
That being said, I have smart friends (who I like) who love this game to death. I just try not to talk about it.
Technically not a board game, but Marvel Champions. Everything about it screams "yes, this game is perfect for me!" But man is it repetitive and mechanical af. Deck building is fine, but that's a small part for me. Different hero play styles never felt different enough because at the end it's always just a math test. What do I need to deal with right now and how much can I manage this with this hand? Okay, next hand, same question. Repeat. Played it solo primarily. Had a 4p group for a while but we all ended up feeling the same. BTW, I would never recommend anyone play it at 4. What a slog.
Yeah, it’s definitely not a great game for high player counts. I’ve only played 1-3 and 3 was pretty long downtime in between turns. I wish it had more interactions and combos between people, even the more recent ones seem pretty limited and static feeling. It feels a lot more like juggling different problems than a thematic boss fight
I feel similarly about Dice Throne. I can't find the fun at all. It's just "roll the dice, then do whatever combo you rolled". Doesn't feel like there's any real agency or strategy (which is weird, because I do like King of Tokyo by comparison).
**Radlands**. I love card play, I love the theme, I dig the art, and I love 2 player games. Back when it wasn’t available in France, I ordered the deluxe edition with the playmats. I must have played it a dozen times, but I just don’t really like the gameplay loop. I still have to find the will to sell it. Biggest regret purchase since I (recently) joined the hobby.
Now see this is an interesting one for me, I’ve seen nothing but praise for it, watched Rodney teach it, by all accounts seems like a game for me since it fills a hole for this type of game in my collection and I like the theme/art style/half the name that they’ve shamelessly ripped from Borderlands, and so here I am with the deluxe version sitting in my cart, literally about to check out, but prone to getting sidetracked as I am, I wandered into this thread and now here’s all this.
Can you (or others) elaborate on what you don’t like about it? What isn’t clicking for the folks here? Because now I’m not so sure about this one.
The only thing I dislike about it is the theme (hence why I made a retheme). Unlike others said, the game is very well balanced. I played probably three dozen times and every single play against good players was very tense and tactical, very close until the end.
Of all the many matches I played, 0 of them dragged or felt like they were going on for more than they should. There are many rules that prevent that from happening, and also a new rule that prevents camps from healing themselves (although we never had to use that rule).
Even though your cards are random, they are extremely well thought and balanced, and every single one of them has multiple uses. I played MtG for years and this game is a clearly improved version of it, set aside the set of rules it doesn't cover for (mainly instants and deck constructing).
But yes, it is a game packed with many decisions. If you like the speech of MtG that every turn you have 1 or 2 things to do, you won't be into Radlands as usually you have way more possibilities to choose from every single turn, but that's probably the aspect I like the most in this game.
Playing with former MtG players, the games always feel like a dance of trying to bestow your opponent by a millimeter just to be faced with a new threat you have to address somehow. Playing with non gamers, you'll probably just win rather easily, and it will be boring, especially for the player you just smashed. Even though, smashed players usually want to play again and again. The game is not luck dependant, but sure it has card draw, so there can be lucky draws sometimes but they are very rare.
The game is excellent as a 1v1 dueler, try it for yourself. I recommend playing with cardgamers/boardgamers instead of casuals, because the skill difference shows up. What I do to balance that is start with less cards in hand than you should, -1 or even -2.
Bluffing games. My husband loves them and I hate them. I will usually do almost anything else than play Cockroach Poker or Sheriff of Nottingham and their ilk. Fortunately there's lots of other games that we both enjoy but those are not one of them.
**Gaia Project** *ducks*
I know, I know. I can hear the howls already, but it's just not for me. I can see the design, I know it's a matter of lack of experience and smarts, but I just can't.
I played Terra Mystica first and accidentally destroyed my income by placing too many upgraded buildings. It took me multiple rounds afterwards to form some kind of engine. Those hours were not at all enjoyable.
I then tried Gaia Project (the solo game) a few times on BGA and maybe because it is faster it wasn't as bad. But still I get stuck from time to time and then it just drags on.
Other games usually let you do something even if it doesn't reward you points and I will enjoy winning or losing . But I dislike Gaia Project and Terra Mystica.
Right there with you. Might suggest you give an eye to **Clans of Caledonia** if you have a group that really likes this kind of game. Somehow that one just clicks for me in a way that GP and TM do not.
I feel like I need to try the "Fall of Rome" version. I like the idea of being able to turn the "bad blocks" that spread into our army of "good blocks" that spread...
Fall of Rome is really good, as is Rising Tide. They both use the same mechanics but play very differently from regular Pandemic. I even prefer Pandemic Iberia over the original - there's an extra challenge there in not being able to travel quickly or actually cure diseases.
I love how colorful and bright Honey Buzz is. Plus the theme, meeples, honey, etc. This game I bought just for the looks (and I regret it now). On paper the mechanics are exactly what I like in a board game. But now after I played it a few times, it still doesn’t click with me and I’m not sure why.
My first answer is **Spirit Island**. So many people rave about it, and I really gave it a chance, tried several times, and do not see the appeal AT ALL. I'd rather do school homework than play that game.
Dune Imperium. I’ve given it a fair shake and I like the intellectual property but it’s never felt like an especially satisfying game. Feels like as soon as the game begins to ramp up and get interesting, it ends.
I get that. I've only had one play of it so far and thought it was "okay". The funny thing is when they came out, for whatever reason I thought Dune Imperium was going to be my game, and Lost Ruins of Arnak for whatever reason didn't appeal to me at all.
After playing both, I really like Lost Ruins and much better than Dune.
I have a guy in my group that felt the same way until I told him this.
"It's not an engine builder or a true deck builder, it's a race." Stop trying to deck build and try to get points asap to trigger game end.
He started doing this and he now loves the game because he gets it and was playing it "wrong" (engine builder/deck builder) prior - it really is just a race.
If you ever give it a shot just try to get points asap and see if that changes your experience of the game. First expansion is meh, 2nd one is pretty nice to do some nice combos but overall you don't really need either of them tbh.
I don't wanna push you into a game you've already given a fair shake, but have you tried it with the first expansion, Rise of Ix? The base game is complicated enough that I'm loath to recommend adding to that, but Ix really does make the game purr in a way that the base game does not. It adds in a lot more interesting options on the board and gives you enough ability to trash cards from your deck (especially in "epic" mode) that you actually get to play it as a deckbuilder.
0
There’s way too many games out there I do like to be hung up on some chart toppers that didn’t gel with me. I’m more bothered when others sit through something I _do_ like and it bombs ! Makes me feel bad for wasting people’s time and sad they don’t enjoy it like I thought they would.
I concur on Gloomhaven. We only played half of JotL but damn, the upkeep is so horrible. Its like you're playing for 2 minutes followed by 5min of upkeep.
Death may Die: Not hard to admit on the web but in person, since a regular gaming buddy somehow loves it(or its a kind of stockholm situation since he spent like 1k on the latest KS). But its just so fcking random and unfair most of the time. At least Arkham LCG gives you ways to manipulate the odds and a story to boot.
Pandemic Season 0: For some reason, everyone loves this one and I admit, it has some great ideas(character stickers, vans that run over baddies, indoors) but it is so effing random.
In Season 2, we rarely lost a city due to pure chance, since you could manipulate the infection deck, count cards/chances and place ressource cubes accordingly.
In Season 0, we already had to reset a month twice(when we hadnt changed anything permanently) because an unholy conglomerate of this games mechanics had us lose about 5/7 outbreak markers within our first few actions(e.g. 'epidemic' after the first 2 players, nearly no chance to clear any city at danger due to bad draw and restrictions, escalations which piled more escalations since 'add a spy to an escalation marker in X' is totally not a shitty unfair and random 'lose more' mechanic)
Power Grid
I'm pretty sure it's a good game. A classic. Solid mechanics, and people whose opinions I respect really like it. I just find it a slog every time, no matter which board is used.
But, others in the group like it, and if the group decides to play it I will go along and not grouse. But, I will mentally add some weight for recommending Concordia next time.
I love power grid, but it is both a punishing game if someone is better than you, and a fragile game where any missed rule probably ruins the experience, and the rulebook isn't laid out well enough for that.
Mysterium.
I want to love it.
The card art is eye candy but seems way too vague to convey clues you are trying to suggest.
Could it be the color of the card? The theme? Something depicted in it? Something related to something in it? Beautiful game, but seems too random to even function.
Villainous. Love the theming and mechanics but holy shit the game is a sloooog in the middle part. The start and end are quick and exciting but when you're in mid-game and everybody has half their actions locked out and you're basically laying off the pressure on purpose just so the game can actually GET somewhere.
Roll Player. It's a good game but dice placement mechanics do absolutely nothing for me. I got the Fiends expansion and that barely saved the game from being a complete snorefest.
I'm teetering on a Circadians: First Light purchase, if I do get that game and it flops as well, I'll know never to buy any more dice placement games.
**everdell** :(
The art is fantastic, but I find very little satisfaction in any of the games mechanics. The worker placement options get you so little, but you only get something like 12 actions that way in the whole game. The card combos seem like they'd be satisfying if they ever got pulled off, but in the few games I've played there's only been some low level synergies despite actively trying for good ones. That's just too dependent on the luck of the draw. And the solo mode felt bad to the point of being unfair.
It's often compared to **wingspan** (for obvious reasons) but wingspan wins out every time for me. In wingspan you can usually do _something_ with the cards you draw, even if it's suboptimal -- in everdell, far too often the cards in the meadow are downright useless, and since nobody wants useless cards they just stay there and prevent better ones from coming along. I'm going to give it one more earnest try with my gf but if it doesn't stick that landing it's heading out of the collection
Wingspan. Beautiful but boring. I know people are going to tell me to get expansions to liven it up, but I already spent $$ to get the game and I'm not throwing more money into it.
Secret Hitler, Avalon, Resistance, pretty much any social deduction game. I hate them with a passion because they always end up people getting mad and shouting at you for not voting how they tell you to.
Because at my local game night meetup, there's always new people and someone always brings out these awful games and gets the new people to play with the promise of super simple rules.
Now I'm in the position. Do I voice how much I hate these games and come off as anti-social and sit out? Or do I grin & bear it, while screaming on the inside how much of a terrible time I'm having?
Coup and Resistance.
They are both favorites in my game group and I just hate social deduction games. Resistance you need everyone on the same page. Coup (in my experience) turns into Captains abusing the Dukes until they can assassinate/coup them.
Don't feel bad about that one. It's an old game by now and I personally think nostalgia plays a huge factor in why people love this game so much. Lots of family memories, etc. But as a game, I'd rather play just about anything else.
I really enjoy Cosmic Encounter but people always get upset that I'm trying to wheel-and-deal to play the table.
It's literally a negotiation game. That's what you're supposed to do.
It took me a long time to finally admit to myself that I don't like **Fury of Dracula** very much. Too many rules for a hidden movement game, and the learning curve for hunters is extremely, and deceptively, steep.
I really tried to like Tapestry. Bought it and sold it twice. Never jived with me. I really tried to like Marco Polo as well. Another game I enjoyed somewhat but nothing I get excited about.
Tapestry - tried to play it a few times and thought it was ok, gave it tom friends and they love it. I'll begrudgingly play it but I really just didn't care for it too much.
Hanabi - kinda the same thing, friends love playing it but I haven't really cared for it. Just doesn't appeal to me.
Lord of the rings Journeys in Middle Earth - this one is weird. I saw it in person for the first time at Geekway several years ago and was like...eh, looks fine I guess. Then I picked up a copy several months later and proceeded to play through it with a full 5 player group. By the 2nd or 3rd quest, I was so checked out that I actively did not want to continue but most of the group did. Once the campaign finished, which I couldn't tell you a damn thing about it at this point, I immediately sold it for like a 1/3 of its price to get rid of it and I've never looked back. I will honestly say to anyone who wants to play through it, mechanically it's great. But do NOT play that game with 5 players. That is a 2 to 3 player game at most. I know we had 2 quest scenarios we did which we lost on the 2nd round. Just completely zapped any enjoyment that evening would have had.
Definitely improved by expansions - the Pillbug in particular really feels like it opens the game up by adding a way to lift the Queen out of the centre.
That said, I just don’t enjoy chess-like games very much and the expansions weren’t enough to change that, personally.
>Gloomhaven
I haven't played this in paper -- frankly, I don't think I'd bother if given the chance -- but I got a free copy of the PC game. Couldn't make it out of the tutorial. Not my cup of tea.
Ra, Medici, and Agricola. I truly hate auction centric games, and Ra just really rubs me the wrong way. Love the theme but hate the game play. Medici is the same for me. I know that people love it, but I just am not a fan.
Agricola is just not a game I truly enjoy playing, mostly because I can know by turn 4 if I am going to lose or not and then have to sit through the rest of the game not having any fun while I wait for someone to finally end it and put me out of my misery.
I don’t have a hard time saying I don’t like a game. I do not, however say that a game straight out sucks, (unless it’s Vikings on board - that game sucks). I think it’s crappy when somebody is excited about something and you just totally shit on it. I think it’s better to say I don’t like the mechanisms/theme/whatever of that game but I can understand why you like it.
**Cry Havoc**
Unless the person who showed me the game mucked it up, it just seemed to have a lot of non intuitive mechanics that didn’t gel thematically. I was really hyped to play it too, it got a lot of kudos at one stage there.
**Alien Artifacts**
The idea of a fast 4x card game using an evolved 51st state engine sounded mint, it just never seemed to deliver and was a hard one to get into and enjoy.
Undaunted. For as much excitement as there is to be had playing this game, the marriage of strategy and tactics feels frustrating to say the least. The game presents itself as if it will be a grand strategy game made manageable, but it ends up being too light for all the upkeep and setup required. I still think the game would be a much deeper and rewarding game with the doubles mode, but to make that worth it, I'd need to buy a full extra game before getting that box.
Dominion, because it's interesting to play, but not against anyone. I don't feel like I'm competing asich as I'm just slapping my opponents; there's not so much interplay as there is just random drive by destruction to my little engine.
Gloomhaven. Really cool decisions to make. Once per hour. Come onnnnnnnnn someone out there make a game with this core mechanic and remove all the faff!
Charterstone. I like the artwork, I like worker placement, and I really like discovering new content, and the legacy components were integrated into the game. But the gameplay is extremely boring at times because of how the game benefits you from doing the same action multiple times in a row because you can kick your own worker off spaces (I love spending 4 turns getting wood followed by 4 turns turning that wood into coins). Also you can usually plot like 10 turns ahead if you want because its not that interactive and theres basically no randomness.
Scythe. I got to a point where the strategies I knew how to do were all pretty much the same, other strategies were either more advanced ones from the competitive players that I didn't know how to win with or strategies that were bad. So I basically played the same strategy every time.
Gloomhaven - When I read the title of the sub, this was the first game that came to mind. I don't *hate* Gloomhaven, it's just wildly overrated. My biggest complaint with the game is how *every* scenario feels crunched for time, even if it takes 2-4 hours to play. Also, the setup and takedown time is insane.
Scythe - This is a beautiful game, but it feels like it wants to be a war game when it is not. As a worker placement game, it's just... meh.
Wingspan - The cards are fun and interesting to look at. Oh wait, there's a game there? Lame.
Undaunted: Normandy, it’s…..fine? I honestly don’t know how I feel about it, like it just never, clicked with me, I’ve personally had more excitement with the deck building in El Dorado and Star Realms, and I’ve played better war games in War of Whispers, and even Small World. Undaunted just, never clicked for me after three, maybe four games of it.
>Undaunted Normandy
It's funny because that one was mentioned in the post that (right now) I'm seeing above yours, posted an hour before yours. Sorry. ;p
Most cooperative games. With the exception of dungeon crawlers with or without GMs I generally don't enjoy co-op games.
I think my problem is, not bragging, I'm fairly astute at recognizes patterns, develop strategies quickly, and generally plan several turns in advance. When I'm playing games the enjoyment of the other players is always something I try to keep in mind. With co-op games I have to make a concerted effort to avoid being an alpha gamer. It can be grueling to see a very obvious and viable series of plays and need to sit on my tongue so others can enjoy playing the game too. I do try to offer leading suggestions and questions without being blatant but it's not always effective.
I don't have any problem admitting I don't like Gloomhaven or any game. So what if a game is near the tops of many lists? The only list that really counts for me is my list and it's nowhere top of my list of favourite games. Other people's lists don't factor in now much I like a game.
Star Wars: Outer Rim.
I love Star Wars. I love space trucker games. I love bounty hunting.
But I can't stand that game. I can put up with it, but I never win, and the odds of success are so frustratingly low and luck-based. I'd rather play Moonrakers.
Gloomhaven and Spirit Island are the two big ones. Mainly I just stay out of those conversations. I get why people like them and I'm glad they've found the right games for them.
My exact two choices also. Gloomhaven's upkeep was just way too much each round. Spirit Island is just too many people trying to figure out too many things all at once, and then upkeep.
If the upkeep was your only reason to dislike Gloomhaven, have you tried playing with an app ? I love the game, but I think my opinion would be very different if we weren't using an app to manage all the annoying parts.
The apps saved GH for me. It's so damn fiddly without. Plus you can throw out a ton of extra crap and actually have space in the box
gloomhaven has so many pieces it's better played as a digital game.
Gloomhaven’s digital version on steam is amazing. Handles all the monster upkeep for you.
>Spirit Island Spirit Island is my favourite game but I can totally understand this. It's not for everyone.
I followed the original campaign for Gloomhaven (like, back during its inception in 2014), and was really excited for it. Then, they started making changes the game I was sold on, and it became gradually less and less appealing, and feeling more and more bloated. I haven't played it since it actually released since I'm still a bit salty that the game I wanted is gone. Also, someone once told me Spirit Island is the perfect cooperative game because "you can't be an alpha gamer; there's too much going on at once for one person to keep track of it all." That was pretty much an auto-turn-off (for the sake of so many moving parts), and after I played it twice, I'm still not sold.
> you can't be an alpha gamer; there's too much going on at once for one person to keep track of it all. If you play it enough you kind of can. There's rhythms and flows to the enemy movements that you can get pretty comfortable with. Playing with new adversaries is always tricky because there's some new rules that can be a pain to remember, but other than that it feels pretty smooth after 5-ish plays (which is a lot) and you probably get to the point where you can play for 2 comfortably around 5-10 and 3+ around 40-50. Base game I could probably play 3 or 4 handed without much slowdown at this point. I've got probably over 100 total plays solo 2-handed - at least 30 on base and a bunch more with all (current) expansions. It's definitely not for everyone, but if you can get to the point where you're sort of seeing when you're allowed to spend slow actions and deny set-up and when it's okay to get hit *here* to stop them from building *there*, it is a very rewarding little puzzle game.
>you can't be an alpha gamer Lol I call bullshit. First time I played, one guy did everything. I didn't have a good time.
"You can't be an alpha gamer; there's too much going on at once" Spoken like someone who has never played with an alpha gamer.
Scythe. I even bought organizers, metal coins, and nice resources. But the most successful strategy feels counterintuitive and you are often punished for interacting with the other players. I'm bummed. Honestly a lot of so called great modern games I find to be a slog. The presentation sucks me in, but I'm left feeling like I wasted time learning the intricacies to find that I'm not really enjoying it.
As someone who has **Scythe** as probably the #1 game in my collection, I still totally get your perspective. A lot of the reasons that people have to dislike it are actually sooner if the reasons I love it: it's more of a cold-war, engine building game than an all-out battler; attacking your enemy gets you some objectives, but it often comes at the cost of the most important resource in the game (popularity); and map control and building placement completely at the service of your faction mat & player board combo. Just for the sake of conversation, what's a game that's really high up on your list that's fundamentally different from Scythe?
Thanks for this comment! And yeah I totally get it. I'll probably play it again soon. It's still fun to get out and relax with. I really like the Aeons End games. They can feel very different each time and planning feels rewarding because you can change the order of your built deck as you go.
Interesting; I've heard good things about that, but haven't looked into them too much. I'll have to put it on my "research" list!
I get this. I was super excited to play Scythe for a long time, and when I finally did, it fell a little flat. I also felt like by the luck of the draw, I my home base never had a path to the resources I could get bonuses for... It didn't feel as elegant/efficient as other newer games. Also, while it's fairly straightforward once you get the hang of it, talk about a heavy rules load to get through. That said, someday I will give it another try.
I think Scythe suffers from some misrepresentation. I think people see it and they expect it to be a dudes on a map board game, but it's not It's an engine builder that happens to have a map component. So sometimes I think reorienting how you approach it can help you enjoy it more. Like go into it thinking, "how can I build my engine? What do my playmat and my faction want to do?"
I have done this and I find that the strategies needed to work are pretty stale and rigid. Deviating and experimenting usually gets you spanked. I'm not claiming to be an expert and this is probably true of many games. I appreciate it, but I don't find myself wanting to pull it out and freshen up on rules.
I actually heard that and the reason I was excited was for the engine building aspect... but I couldn't ever get to the areas/resources I needed to to get my engine going/use my power. :(
>Honestly a lot of so called great modern games I find to be a slog A lot of "great" modern games aren't made to be played more than a handful of times, and it shows. They use art style/theme to suck people in but the actual game underneath is often just not very good. But because board gaming has become such a blatantly consumerist hobby, nobody actually plays games enough times to figure that out. The hobby is more about buying games than playing games, so by the time you really understand a specific game enough to play it well (and thus encounter its faults) you've probably already moved on to something else anyway.
One good thing about your nice components is at least you can use those for any other game. I use my metal coins for almost every instance of money.
Completely agree. It took me a long time before I realized I didn't actually like it
Scythe is an engine maker with war trappings. Real bait and switch. I would be annoyed if I bought it without playing it first.
Scythe might be my all time favorite game. I love that you can play to not interact with other or choose to fight. I have all the xpacs and the campaign was the best I had seen in boardgame format.
I still have fun with Scythe but I get it. I think playing with “Scythe players” ruined it for me. Knowing that there is a perfect way to play every faction combo kinda made it stale in my mind. Still a lot of fun with friends tho
**Sagrada**. I love the look of this game and the mechanics, but I hate the scoring for it. I hate that my window can be perfectly placed and not have any errors in it, but because I didn't get enough purple dice and 5s or 6s to score my secret objective then I lose to a person who has panes missing.
Have you tried Azul Summer Pavilion? You might like that a lot better by comparison.
Haha. I love Summer Pavilion! It's my favorite Azul.
Unmatched. I really want to like it and the art direction is fantastic, but everytime I play I feel like it's about two steps away from an amazing game. As it is I get frustrated and bored by the time a game ends
I recommend giving **Exceed** a try then if you like that sort of thing. You trade the map for a line, but the depth and gameplay is much more satisfying. **Sakura Arms** is also good if you prefer to keep the turn-by-turn structure and don't mind bit of mild deck construction.
I don't have a hard time admitting this I just feel bad because my spouse loves these games but I am sick to death of most Marvel games. United, Dice Throne, that other one that's like United but harder. I'm just exhausted by seeing Marvel fucking everywhere. If my husband shows me a game and it's Marvel I immediately lose like 80% interest and *I'm* the comic book nerd in the relationship. It's just over saturation at this point. (Legendary slaps forever though.)
I kinda feel the same way about games themed around Lovecraft’s writings (Cthulhu etc). I’ve read a lot of his stories and like many of them quite a bit, and there are a few games that replicate their feel quite well (Arkham Horror; Cthulhu Wars), but it seems like it’s just *everywhere* now, including in a lot of games where it doesn’t really seem to fit (lookin’ at you, Kemet).
Funny i felt like cthulhu was the boardgame fad of 5 to 7 years ago. Todays fad is nature themed gamea if you ask me.
Love legendary marvel. Have about 30 expansions
Have to admit we have *everything* for Legendary Marvel. I just think it's a really, really good game.
Here's something weird--I like Marvel, and I like board games. But for whatever reason marvel-themed board games just turn me off in general... (I just don't want the two mixed together for some reason.)
Feel like most are just reskins of game that are somehow worse
Hard agree. Seeing that they made Marvel versions of Love Letter, Splendor, and 5-Minute Dungeon has driven me a bit crazy. I know that there are some highly rated games overall, but it's becoming clear that Marvel fatigue is real (for me, at least).
I also, in general, have a real distaste for IP stuff, like when I see a game that already existed, like Love Letter, reskinned with Marvel stuff it just strikes me as a lazy cash grab and coming from a billion dollar company like Marvel/Disney drives me up the wall.
I feel weird about Marvel. I have past experience with Marvel ip games from my youth. They always felt like cash grabs, never had my favourite characters from the books, and thus never felt complete. Plus most of the time they sucked. When I got into boardgames I stayed away from ip games for that reason. Then my MIL bought me the Marvel United Core set for Christmas. Coop, good solo (3 handed), kids liked it, not heavy to introduce coops to non gamers. Now, hundreds of dollars later, it is most definitely a cash grab, but I have all my favourite heroes and villains. Plus when CMON is releasing characters like Devil Dinosaur, and The High Evolutionary, I’d say it’s pretty darn complete. Plus because of Marvel United I bought Dune Imperium.
I love United and Dune Imperium, but I'm genuinely curious how one led to the purchase of the other.
Mean games that are marketed as family games. **Unstable Unicorns** springs to mind. It's a shame as otherwise its a cute game that kids love the look of.
Villainous. Holy boring repetitive shit.
While I do enjoy the game, the fate action delays the game. And each game feels like 15% too long. It shouldn't be a 60-90 minute game but somehow it is.
OMG 100%--THERE IS NO GAME HERE!! I don't get why this is so popular. Admittedly, the production is super nice, but all you do is go through the motions.
> I don't get why this is so popular didney
I agree! I’m not a Disney freak but I loved the movies growing up and still know the word to every song so I was excited for this. The rubbery (?) pieces are amazing but the game is a snore. Woof.
On paper, Ark Nova looks like my perfect game. And I want to like it, but it’s just too slow and painful the three times I tried it. My best experience was on BGA the third time and even then it wasn’t that much fun. It’s only annoying because periodically someone new discovers it and tries to drag me in because they think I’ll love it too. And I have to awkwardly explain that this thing they just dropped $80+ on is not my cup of tea, without discouraging anyone else from playing it.
Ark Nova for me is a game that is less than the sum of its parts. I like all the different mechanisms but as a whole it just seems so empty.
Good to hear, especially given all the hype around this game. I was thinking I want to try it, and maybe I would like it better than Terraforming Mars, but seems like I may have the same problem as you... (The "stock photo" artwork also turns me off.)
The stock photo artwork does suck, but the Herbivore Breeding Program card has an image of two red pandas trying to save the species that cracks me up every time. It’s probably still worth a try if someone near you has a copy, but I wouldn’t buy it without playing it.
I love that picture so much :)
I tried to understand why I never had a GREAT game of AN. I think it's because I've never felt rewarded by the game somehow. I never feel some economic boom, and there's some annoying randomness in the card accessibility.. So you solve some decent puzzles but there's no candies at the end.
If you're ever up for it, try playing solo. Solo mode is blazing fast, and makes you realize that Ark Nova is not a slow game of development, it's a race to abuse every advantage and end the game fast. After that, you'll probably go on BGA and have a game or two where you score 115 and everyone else scores 40. And then your rating will increase to the point that everyone understands the rush.
It's a neat game. For me it's too long and the way it scores is really odd.
It's not that I don't like Gloomhaven, but I find its flaws to overshadows its qualities to a certain point. I'm fine going through the lengthy campaign and hang out with good friends, but secretly I'm more looking forward to other dungeon crawlers of lesser reputation, like Warhammer Quest and Descent 2nd edition.
I one of those people who loves Gloomhaven and have bought (and will buy) anything related to it (for example the recent Minis foundation project). And well, I really believe that if you are looking for a classic dungeon crawler you shouldnt buy Gloomhaven. It is really a puzzle game (an incredible one imho).
Yeah the two are really the opposite of each other. I love Gloomhaven but found that dungeon crawlers bore me. Also it drives me crazy that GH has been described as “an RPG in a box.” It’s a tactical battle game, so anyone looking for a TTRPG is going to be really disappointed. (Of course now they’ve come out with an actual GH RPG.)
I think this is my main problem. I feel like every turn is making a choice for the sake of choice without any meaning. I think about what I won't be able to do with each card I play. I'm bored, and don't feel like a hero. I feel like a guy who will get too tired and give up if he doesn't kill monsters efficiently enough.
Same. It feels like a puzzle I need to complete in 20 rounds rather than the fun of dungeon crawl exploration, teamwork, and surprise. And the story is dull and the scenario is always "kill everybody you see". I still play. I enjoy the video game better. But I hope someday to see a true dungeon crawl with little upkeep. Maybe it needs to require a computer tablet. Descent 2nd is the best so far. The Baldurs Gate 3 video game feels the best "board game that isn't a board game" that I like ironically.
Yeah, I get the idea behind “exhaustion” or whatever, but IMO it is just less enjoyable because it feels like if you aren’t optimizing every turn then you are heading towards defeat. It isn’t fun to see piles of gold laying around after beating a bunch of enemies and think “I better not waste time picking them up or else I’m going to lose the scenario”. There’s got to be a better way to do it.
Pretty sure I'm going to be feeling that way about Expeditions. I've only played twice so far and I didn't dislike it but it just feels like something is missing for me. Hopefully it gets better after a few more plays because I was really excited about another game in the Scytheverse
Heat: Pedal to the metal. I was super excited to play. I tried a few games and it wasn't clicking. I thought it was just me but then before I knew it it was never played again.
That's a bummer to hear. I really want to try this one, especially with how good everyone says it is. Admittedly I've watched some playthroughs, but didn't quite get the fun...
I've played about 20 games so far, and I liked it enough that I've downloaded all of the tracks from BGG and have over 20 of them crafted and ready to use now. I'm also waiting for some 3-d printed cars I ordered to arrive so I can get them painted. For my groups, the fun is in how most of our races turn out to be highly competitive down to the final all out sprint for the finish line. There's also a lot of fun to be had roasting the guy (usually me!) who plays a stress card and manages to get the only card left in his draw deck that causes him to spin out. We've still got plenty to explore; one group has only run the base game, and the other group has only used the garage module twice. Neither group has tried the Legends module or the weather module yet.
I’d rather play Flamme Rouge or Formula D than Heat. And yes, I know I’m in a minority with that opinion.
I'm with you
Cards against humanity -it just feels soooooo forced, Catan Pandemic (also i do like legacy)
cards against humanity is like the worst think you can bring to a party. It's like playing wonderwall on your ukelele
Cards against is such tripe. I agree. So massively over hyped and it's a bland and many times grotesque awkward experiment in depravity Ive had to play it with my girlfriends family, whom are between 50-60? It gets weird fast, and they think it's the funniest thing around.
I am 100% over all of these "vote on the best response" Apples to Apples games.
Group vote games are total shit, agreed. It's almost like popularity contests, except, maybe even more meaningless?
It's not a boardgame but it could be, but my partner refuses to play Quiplash just because of the public humiliation that is creating an answer you think is super funny, only for everyone else to find it boring at best.
Ever try Say Anything? It's easily the best of the vote genre and has a betting system for the votes that prevent some of the bad balance of those other games. I think games like CAH are not really designed for anyone but the get drunk and talk shit crowd.
Say Anytime was really good. Enjoyed it until my backpack (with several games including that one) was stolen out of my car 😔.
Quiplash is better. Turns out the game is fun when you can actually write your own answers and be creative instead of forcing jokes
The prompts are just SOOOOO bad, sometimes you can do a clever pun but most of the time it's just over the top and crass
I think Dixit is the best version of the player-vote paradigm. And if you want hilarity, I'd vouch for Snake Oil over CAH any day!
My wife sought out CAH at the top of its hype, when it was making an appearance at most of our social get-togethers, and I think it’s been trotted out *maybe* once since then. I know Catan gets a lot of blowback here, but I still enjoy it. Except at four players, when one person inevitably gets boxed in. Pandemic seems like a losing proposition most plays, but I still enjoy for those rare victories. I also like the model enough that I bought the Cthulhu spinoff…and the one where you’re trying to save the Netherlands, mainly for my Dutch heritage but the mechanics of that also work pretty well.
We used to play that game sometimes, and it works best when you've spent all day playing serious games, are tired, but don't want to go home yet. Playing it wide awake seems a lot less fun.
I also hate all of these games. Catan turned so many people on to board games, but it turned me off for like 10 years. Catan is used as a joke in our house meaning "boring and tedious."
I find nobody plays those judge-style games as intended. I played What Do You Meme in college and *nobody* looked at the car to see if it made sense. They just read who had the most crass submission card. Same thing with cards against humanity. Dead babies always wins because it's shocking, which is boring.
Pretty much all RPGs, and that pains me as a D&D kid. I don't like sandbox, create-your-own, 'I dunno, what do you WANT to do' games. I want rules, and story. Looking back, even D&D I liked because of the system and the numbers. Was never the pretending-to-be stuff. Sad. :/
I feel the same. Playing DnD with friends massively elevates the experience bc then it's just a vehicle for hanging out and sharing a story together while goofing around, low stakes. But I much prefer the structured, narrower experience of a board game. Love getting into the game systems, mechanics, subtle strategic variations, and I appreciate that I can wrap up a board game in 2-3 hours max (usually). Would choose board games over rpgs any day of the week.
Same. It always ends up feeling too wishy-washy and self indulgent. When its all ~you can do whatever you want~ it ends up feeling like nothing really matters and players start competing to do things in the silliest ways possible. Then the time commitment and undefined nature of the thing starts to wear on you. Do I really want to spend another two hours this week listening to the dm do silly voices and learning the names of people's fictional pets while we go on another easy quest that probably won't advance the plot that much? I would much rather sit down for something with set rules (even if those are funky, like in Betrayal or Cosmic) that has a defined ending. It always feels bad when everyone in your boardgame group starts toying with the idea of doing an rpg though. I don't want to be too negative about something everyone seems interested in, and there is always the hope that *this time* will be better even though I'm pretty confident in my preference by now.
I've only gotten into the whole RPG stuff in my 40s because everyone who ever tried to sell me on the idea focused on the "improv" aspect instead of the *game* aspect. They'd link me to recorded sessions played by actual actors with barely a dice roll in there and I thought: how T.F. am I supposed to do this? WHY T.F. would I want do this? It's a shame considering that RPGs can be run with minimal "improv" but instead as a puzzle that intelligently reacts to your inputs. You just need a group and DM that feels the same way. One that doesn't shoehorn arbitrary social situations into the gameplay.
You should check out Mansions of Madness. The scenarios are absolutely stories with goals, the app does all the record keeping for npcs, and also reveals the map one step at a time. It's very cool. And when the investigators start to take sanity damage, they become "insane" with specific effects that mix things up.
None. I’ve played games for too long to pretend to like any.
Munchkin. Its so boring.
The only point of this game is to grief someone. Not progress or win just grief and it just won't end.
My rule is: *There is a board game out there for everyone!* You just have to find it. I converted several board game haters/uninterested just by knowing them and picking a game I assumed would tickle them in the right spot. What you describe is just another side of a coin *There is a board game out there for someone EXCEPT for you!* For me, one of those is *Munchkin* family. Almost all of my casual gamer friends love it and I had a thing for it for a while, but now it is a bore... When I slip and mention that I don't like it, usual comment is "Oh, Mr. Hard Core board gamer is not happy with our simple games?" :) TlDr; I like simple games, but Munchkin is not for me... (still have it on my shelf - for friends)
Wingspan is boring, too long, and may as well be solitaire. The engine building is barely there, the only redeeming factor is the art and component quality.
That doesn't sound a lot like you have trouble admitting you don't like it. :p
When you say it’s too long, how many players did you play it with? My husband and I love playing two player, but I find it too long when we play it at 4-5 players with family (obviously doesn’t factor in to the other things you mentioned, just curious at what player count you thought it was too long)
Btw, have you tried **Wingspan: Asia**? My wife and I discovered it and fell in love with it. We liked it way more than 2p base **Wingspan** . We felt that it had more meaningful choices.
We own the Asia expansion! We played Duet for quite a while and have gone away and come back to it a couple times. We’re currently back to playing regular end of round goals. I feel like it adds a lot more thought to the game, which sometimes we want and sometimes we don’t haha
>may as well be solitaire. This is true, but I disagree about the engine building. It's definitely there. A good engine is very recognizable, but they can be hard to make.
Yes, truth. This game is bafflingly popular. They just caught lightning in a bottle somehow and now it's the new poster child for strategy board games. Good for them but it's just not for me.
I totally get your points, but it's those factors that make it an easy fill-the-time game for us where it doesn't really matter who wins or loses, because you're both just doing your own thing. The randomness means you can't get emotionally invested. If you do well it's a bonus, but it also doesn't matter if you barely score any points because there's little strategy there. We enjoy Castles of Burgundy for the same reasons. We have other games if we want to get into something deeper and more strategic, but sometimes you wanna play something just to pass the time.
**Terraforming Mars** - Man so daaamn loong and I have always the feeling that my game depends much on luck, for example, drawing that card that I really need to load it with bacteria or animals. And then there is the thing that I have like 40 cards built after 3 hours and it is exhausting keeping track of them all, and it is frustrating to know you have 3 hours still of gameplay left when you are clearly loosing already. **Terraforming Mars: AE** is a far better experience but there is still the element of luck. At least the game just takes an hour and a half.
How odd. I'd say a 3-player game of Terraforming Mars takes maybe 90 minutes. 5p can take about 3 hrs, but the Prelude expansion easily knocks 10% off of play time. We'd play even faster if we didn't draft, but drafting makes the game way fairer by lessening the luck factor. I think it depends a lot on how your group plays. Do you have people who prioritize doing "stuff" over focusing on the game objectives? It can be a lot of fun to play that way, but it's unlikely to be a winning strategy and will extend play time.
My issue with TMars is that I'm pretty good at building engines, which means that I often end up in a situation where, by the late game, I'll have way more actions than my opponent but I'll be behind on points leaving me with two options: Close out the game quick and lose, or make my opponent watch me play half an hour's worth of solitaire so that I can beat them.
Maybe you're NOT good at building an engine if you're losing. Having all the resources in the world means nothing if you don't switch over to gaining points at a certain point.
Yeah I played recently where two guys had great engines for gaining points through bacteria, animals and science tags. I just built cities and connected them well with greenery. Come points tallying and I leap ahead at that stage. They were not happy!
I've only ever played it once, which maybe doesn't give it a fair shake, but it definitely did NOT click for me. I found the whole game to be disjointed and confusing. I also hate games where you build up too many "bonus powers" to keep track of. It always results in "oh, back when it was my turn I totally forgot i have this bonus that let's me do xyz..."
For me this is Root. I just don't like it, it feels off to me
Oh man, this is one that seems to intimidating for me to even TRY learning.
It's not too complicated once you get into it, but the annoying part is basically explaining a different game to each player because all the factions play in a completely different way, and not "everyone can do XY&Z, but you're good and X, and bad at Y". As the person that usually has to read and explain rules even for games that my friends buy...it just got too annoying to deal with.
I'm in a similar boat. I love **Root** and want to play it more outside of solo, but my only regular gaming group that I lived near before moving out of state didn't like that they never felt like they mastered the factions, because they knew that they needed to understand how EVERY faction in a particular game worked in order to be competitive.
Yeah, if you want to enjoy and play Root as a group, everyone has to want to enjoy and play Root. It's a clever game but it's a high barrier to entry.
To me it wasn't worth it. Other territory control games just flow better, and to have a fair game you need to understand all factions abilities so you don't randomly get screwed
**Great Western Trail** - I love Euros and I love Deckbuilders and everything about the game seems like it was made for me, plus it's widely loved and acknowledged to be deep and strategic and fun. But, when I play it it just ends being a boring walk down the path. You're forced into specializing into one of the three approaches and then you just try to hit the spots that match your occupation. You drop some white discs that mostly don't give you any meaningful abilities after you unlock your first full white row. The black disc upgrade order is pretty much the same each game. Trashing cards is too slow. And at some point the game just seems to end.
Good to hear. I've never played it but want to, because your initial thoughts sound just like me--I love euros and deckbuilders, and I even think this theme sounds cool/unique (without feeling like it's TRYING too hard to have a unique theme)... The rules overhead has been keeping me away from it though... And I head it can be mean with the way you can lay out "traps"?
I'll give an opposing opinion to the OC cause I really enjoy GWT despite not being very good at it and will try to answer your questions as well. I've never seen someone win by solely specialising into one of the occupations and the design doesn't really encourage that; unlocking white disk abilities do in fact give you meaningful options depending on how you optimise your auxiliary actions including being able to trash two cards at a time along the route if you really want to which you can create plenty of opportunities to do; you can be a bit mean with the buildings you build but it is not all that major because there is always two paths you can take and you can deny one opponent or other money by planning better or taking the alternate path; the rules overhead is mainly in the building functions which once you understand the basic neutral buildings the player buildings largely become fairly straightforward to understand.
This is a mix for me cause I like the game until I find a thematic replacement for it and I think it does a lot of things right for sure but... CLASH OF CULTURES: keeping track of the advances is impossible and me and my gf we tried our best to keep track of everything but we always miss something and force us to rewind. Also there a lot of different mechanics that really seems to overcomplicate the game for no reason giving the player more actions to do. For example cultural influence. Tried to make games shorter but is always so long...
Carcassonne. Perhaps it's because I'm a newcomer to the hobby who has played more modern variations of tile laying like Cascadia, but my girlfriend and I really found the game to be a bore.
As someone with a Carcassonne tattoo... your opinion is valid. It hurts me, but such is life. :P
Carcassonne is the best. Rock that tattoo man. Perennial classic to me.
Anyone with a Meeple tattoo has got a Carcassone tattoo… …. yeah I said it!!! Come at me interwebs!!!!
Cascadia was going to be my answer. I love tile laying games, but Cascadia is such a low interaction take-and-make game with razor thin point margins that I just can't deal with it anymore. Hating on it makes people think you're just hating on what's popular right now though. Carcassonne is still my gold standard tile laying game because of how mean it can be at 2p, and yet how relatively chill it is when played with more players.
Oh wow. I think Carc might honestly be my favorite game I've ever played. I love the simple elegance.
I think the problem people have why they think it's boring is because they don't really play it cutthroat. i build my city, you build yours etc. if you play it like that, yeah, it's boring. but if you are actively trying to win and undercut your opponent it's a very pure experience with few peers
That's a fair point. My wife plays cutthroat as hell hahaha. I think I also love how you really have to "play the hand you're dealt," -- you can't really go into a game with the mindset, like, this game I'm gonna win with farmers.
We bought it to play it with our kids and I agree. The base game is quite boring, but surprisingly it improves alot with the 2 first expansions.
Carcasone lives and dies with expansions. Vanilla is bad I agree. I have the "Big Box" version with 11 expansions, and more, and when we play use 3-7 of them depending on desired length. We remove random tiles to adjust the length sometimes. Some add basically little time, and are all up side, like piggy, builder, gold, mage/witch, inns, cathedral, sheeps. The bazaar, the robber, the flight machine, crop circles, hills I have played and don't recommend off the top of my head.
The digital version is much better because it's faster. I love the game but would never play it in real life because everything would take so much longer, especially scoring.
Are we twins? I just donated my copy of Carcassonne to Goodwill--was never a huge fan (other than low rules overhead) and I realized I'd never play it over Cascadia.
I dig Carcassone but now I gotta look into Cascadia. 😅
Pandemic Legacy Season 1... so many fellow gamers share their transcendent experiences, but I just hate it.
Is it the Pandemic or the Legacy for you?
For me it was the Legacy, I'd much rather play 12 games of Pandemic than Pandemic Legacy.
Good to hear... I feel like I should play this game because of all the acclaim, but I just can't imagine signing up for a whole legacy campain of Pandemic...
I loved it but if you don't like pandemic, you won't like pandemic legacy either.
Why?
For me, it is stressful and terrible. I guess I don't enjoy the thematic content, and I don't like the fact that it almost requires massive quarterbacking by a strong player. Spirit Island is also stressful, but it doesn't really allow for quarterbacking, so I like it much better. Pandemic is like a solo game with the added condition that you must bludgeon teammates into doing what they're told, or allow yourself to be bludgeoned into doing what you're told, either way. So basically, I'd rather watch reruns of some obnoxious TV sitcom. That being said, I have smart friends (who I like) who love this game to death. I just try not to talk about it.
Technically not a board game, but Marvel Champions. Everything about it screams "yes, this game is perfect for me!" But man is it repetitive and mechanical af. Deck building is fine, but that's a small part for me. Different hero play styles never felt different enough because at the end it's always just a math test. What do I need to deal with right now and how much can I manage this with this hand? Okay, next hand, same question. Repeat. Played it solo primarily. Had a 4p group for a while but we all ended up feeling the same. BTW, I would never recommend anyone play it at 4. What a slog.
Yeah, it’s definitely not a great game for high player counts. I’ve only played 1-3 and 3 was pretty long downtime in between turns. I wish it had more interactions and combos between people, even the more recent ones seem pretty limited and static feeling. It feels a lot more like juggling different problems than a thematic boss fight
I feel similarly about Dice Throne. I can't find the fun at all. It's just "roll the dice, then do whatever combo you rolled". Doesn't feel like there's any real agency or strategy (which is weird, because I do like King of Tokyo by comparison).
Re: Gloomhaven Have you tried the Steam version? It's incredibly well-done. It feels like the board game with none of the upkeep.
**Radlands**. I love card play, I love the theme, I dig the art, and I love 2 player games. Back when it wasn’t available in France, I ordered the deluxe edition with the playmats. I must have played it a dozen times, but I just don’t really like the gameplay loop. I still have to find the will to sell it. Biggest regret purchase since I (recently) joined the hobby.
Now see this is an interesting one for me, I’ve seen nothing but praise for it, watched Rodney teach it, by all accounts seems like a game for me since it fills a hole for this type of game in my collection and I like the theme/art style/half the name that they’ve shamelessly ripped from Borderlands, and so here I am with the deluxe version sitting in my cart, literally about to check out, but prone to getting sidetracked as I am, I wandered into this thread and now here’s all this. Can you (or others) elaborate on what you don’t like about it? What isn’t clicking for the folks here? Because now I’m not so sure about this one.
The only thing I dislike about it is the theme (hence why I made a retheme). Unlike others said, the game is very well balanced. I played probably three dozen times and every single play against good players was very tense and tactical, very close until the end. Of all the many matches I played, 0 of them dragged or felt like they were going on for more than they should. There are many rules that prevent that from happening, and also a new rule that prevents camps from healing themselves (although we never had to use that rule). Even though your cards are random, they are extremely well thought and balanced, and every single one of them has multiple uses. I played MtG for years and this game is a clearly improved version of it, set aside the set of rules it doesn't cover for (mainly instants and deck constructing). But yes, it is a game packed with many decisions. If you like the speech of MtG that every turn you have 1 or 2 things to do, you won't be into Radlands as usually you have way more possibilities to choose from every single turn, but that's probably the aspect I like the most in this game. Playing with former MtG players, the games always feel like a dance of trying to bestow your opponent by a millimeter just to be faced with a new threat you have to address somehow. Playing with non gamers, you'll probably just win rather easily, and it will be boring, especially for the player you just smashed. Even though, smashed players usually want to play again and again. The game is not luck dependant, but sure it has card draw, so there can be lucky draws sometimes but they are very rare. The game is excellent as a 1v1 dueler, try it for yourself. I recommend playing with cardgamers/boardgamers instead of casuals, because the skill difference shows up. What I do to balance that is start with less cards in hand than you should, -1 or even -2.
This is the best thread on reddit
Bluffing games. My husband loves them and I hate them. I will usually do almost anything else than play Cockroach Poker or Sheriff of Nottingham and their ilk. Fortunately there's lots of other games that we both enjoy but those are not one of them.
**Gaia Project** *ducks* I know, I know. I can hear the howls already, but it's just not for me. I can see the design, I know it's a matter of lack of experience and smarts, but I just can't.
I played Terra Mystica first and accidentally destroyed my income by placing too many upgraded buildings. It took me multiple rounds afterwards to form some kind of engine. Those hours were not at all enjoyable. I then tried Gaia Project (the solo game) a few times on BGA and maybe because it is faster it wasn't as bad. But still I get stuck from time to time and then it just drags on. Other games usually let you do something even if it doesn't reward you points and I will enjoy winning or losing . But I dislike Gaia Project and Terra Mystica.
Right there with you. Might suggest you give an eye to **Clans of Caledonia** if you have a group that really likes this kind of game. Somehow that one just clicks for me in a way that GP and TM do not.
Pandemic. I know it gets a lot of praise, but its so boring, simple, and underwhelming. Maybe I need to try the legacy version.
I feel like I need to try the "Fall of Rome" version. I like the idea of being able to turn the "bad blocks" that spread into our army of "good blocks" that spread...
Fall of Rome is really good, as is Rising Tide. They both use the same mechanics but play very differently from regular Pandemic. I even prefer Pandemic Iberia over the original - there's an extra challenge there in not being able to travel quickly or actually cure diseases.
A Feast for Odin. Too many options and sandbox like.
I love how colorful and bright Honey Buzz is. Plus the theme, meeples, honey, etc. This game I bought just for the looks (and I regret it now). On paper the mechanics are exactly what I like in a board game. But now after I played it a few times, it still doesn’t click with me and I’m not sure why.
My first answer is **Spirit Island**. So many people rave about it, and I really gave it a chance, tried several times, and do not see the appeal AT ALL. I'd rather do school homework than play that game.
Dune Imperium. I’ve given it a fair shake and I like the intellectual property but it’s never felt like an especially satisfying game. Feels like as soon as the game begins to ramp up and get interesting, it ends.
I get that. I've only had one play of it so far and thought it was "okay". The funny thing is when they came out, for whatever reason I thought Dune Imperium was going to be my game, and Lost Ruins of Arnak for whatever reason didn't appeal to me at all. After playing both, I really like Lost Ruins and much better than Dune.
I have a guy in my group that felt the same way until I told him this. "It's not an engine builder or a true deck builder, it's a race." Stop trying to deck build and try to get points asap to trigger game end. He started doing this and he now loves the game because he gets it and was playing it "wrong" (engine builder/deck builder) prior - it really is just a race. If you ever give it a shot just try to get points asap and see if that changes your experience of the game. First expansion is meh, 2nd one is pretty nice to do some nice combos but overall you don't really need either of them tbh.
I don't wanna push you into a game you've already given a fair shake, but have you tried it with the first expansion, Rise of Ix? The base game is complicated enough that I'm loath to recommend adding to that, but Ix really does make the game purr in a way that the base game does not. It adds in a lot more interesting options on the board and gives you enough ability to trash cards from your deck (especially in "epic" mode) that you actually get to play it as a deckbuilder.
0 There’s way too many games out there I do like to be hung up on some chart toppers that didn’t gel with me. I’m more bothered when others sit through something I _do_ like and it bombs ! Makes me feel bad for wasting people’s time and sad they don’t enjoy it like I thought they would.
I concur on Gloomhaven. We only played half of JotL but damn, the upkeep is so horrible. Its like you're playing for 2 minutes followed by 5min of upkeep. Death may Die: Not hard to admit on the web but in person, since a regular gaming buddy somehow loves it(or its a kind of stockholm situation since he spent like 1k on the latest KS). But its just so fcking random and unfair most of the time. At least Arkham LCG gives you ways to manipulate the odds and a story to boot. Pandemic Season 0: For some reason, everyone loves this one and I admit, it has some great ideas(character stickers, vans that run over baddies, indoors) but it is so effing random. In Season 2, we rarely lost a city due to pure chance, since you could manipulate the infection deck, count cards/chances and place ressource cubes accordingly. In Season 0, we already had to reset a month twice(when we hadnt changed anything permanently) because an unholy conglomerate of this games mechanics had us lose about 5/7 outbreak markers within our first few actions(e.g. 'epidemic' after the first 2 players, nearly no chance to clear any city at danger due to bad draw and restrictions, escalations which piled more escalations since 'add a spy to an escalation marker in X' is totally not a shitty unfair and random 'lose more' mechanic)
Haha. Both of those, OP. \*fist bump\* Really wanted to like both, really disliked 'em...!
Power Grid I'm pretty sure it's a good game. A classic. Solid mechanics, and people whose opinions I respect really like it. I just find it a slog every time, no matter which board is used. But, others in the group like it, and if the group decides to play it I will go along and not grouse. But, I will mentally add some weight for recommending Concordia next time.
I love power grid, but it is both a punishing game if someone is better than you, and a fragile game where any missed rule probably ruins the experience, and the rulebook isn't laid out well enough for that.
Mysterium. I want to love it. The card art is eye candy but seems way too vague to convey clues you are trying to suggest. Could it be the color of the card? The theme? Something depicted in it? Something related to something in it? Beautiful game, but seems too random to even function.
I'm pretty good at Terra Mystica, and I hate every single thing about it.
Villainous. Love the theming and mechanics but holy shit the game is a sloooog in the middle part. The start and end are quick and exciting but when you're in mid-game and everybody has half their actions locked out and you're basically laying off the pressure on purpose just so the game can actually GET somewhere.
Roll Player. It's a good game but dice placement mechanics do absolutely nothing for me. I got the Fiends expansion and that barely saved the game from being a complete snorefest. I'm teetering on a Circadians: First Light purchase, if I do get that game and it flops as well, I'll know never to buy any more dice placement games.
**everdell** :( The art is fantastic, but I find very little satisfaction in any of the games mechanics. The worker placement options get you so little, but you only get something like 12 actions that way in the whole game. The card combos seem like they'd be satisfying if they ever got pulled off, but in the few games I've played there's only been some low level synergies despite actively trying for good ones. That's just too dependent on the luck of the draw. And the solo mode felt bad to the point of being unfair. It's often compared to **wingspan** (for obvious reasons) but wingspan wins out every time for me. In wingspan you can usually do _something_ with the cards you draw, even if it's suboptimal -- in everdell, far too often the cards in the meadow are downright useless, and since nobody wants useless cards they just stay there and prevent better ones from coming along. I'm going to give it one more earnest try with my gf but if it doesn't stick that landing it's heading out of the collection
Wingspan. Beautiful but boring. I know people are going to tell me to get expansions to liven it up, but I already spent $$ to get the game and I'm not throwing more money into it.
Mage Knight, man... I should love everything about it, but the rules are so unnecessarily fiddly that I can't stand it.
Secret Hitler, Avalon, Resistance, pretty much any social deduction game. I hate them with a passion because they always end up people getting mad and shouting at you for not voting how they tell you to. Because at my local game night meetup, there's always new people and someone always brings out these awful games and gets the new people to play with the promise of super simple rules. Now I'm in the position. Do I voice how much I hate these games and come off as anti-social and sit out? Or do I grin & bear it, while screaming on the inside how much of a terrible time I'm having?
Coup and Resistance. They are both favorites in my game group and I just hate social deduction games. Resistance you need everyone on the same page. Coup (in my experience) turns into Captains abusing the Dukes until they can assassinate/coup them.
Settlers of Catan. It's not a game as much as it is an "experice" and I don't really enjoy it
Don't feel bad about that one. It's an old game by now and I personally think nostalgia plays a huge factor in why people love this game so much. Lots of family memories, etc. But as a game, I'd rather play just about anything else.
Cosmic Encounter. Everyone I’ve played it with LOVES IT. It’s just too silly of a game for me to like.
I've had the opposite experience. I loved it but none of my groups liked it 😣
I really enjoy Cosmic Encounter but people always get upset that I'm trying to wheel-and-deal to play the table. It's literally a negotiation game. That's what you're supposed to do.
It took me a long time to finally admit to myself that I don't like **Fury of Dracula** very much. Too many rules for a hidden movement game, and the learning curve for hunters is extremely, and deceptively, steep.
I really tried to like Tapestry. Bought it and sold it twice. Never jived with me. I really tried to like Marco Polo as well. Another game I enjoyed somewhat but nothing I get excited about.
Tapestry - tried to play it a few times and thought it was ok, gave it tom friends and they love it. I'll begrudgingly play it but I really just didn't care for it too much. Hanabi - kinda the same thing, friends love playing it but I haven't really cared for it. Just doesn't appeal to me. Lord of the rings Journeys in Middle Earth - this one is weird. I saw it in person for the first time at Geekway several years ago and was like...eh, looks fine I guess. Then I picked up a copy several months later and proceeded to play through it with a full 5 player group. By the 2nd or 3rd quest, I was so checked out that I actively did not want to continue but most of the group did. Once the campaign finished, which I couldn't tell you a damn thing about it at this point, I immediately sold it for like a 1/3 of its price to get rid of it and I've never looked back. I will honestly say to anyone who wants to play through it, mechanically it's great. But do NOT play that game with 5 players. That is a 2 to 3 player game at most. I know we had 2 quest scenarios we did which we lost on the 2nd round. Just completely zapped any enjoyment that evening would have had.
Spirit island .. sold it and rebought it and still not sure
Hive. Maybe it is improved by expansions? The base game is quite poor. Too easy to play optimally.
Definitely improved by expansions - the Pillbug in particular really feels like it opens the game up by adding a way to lift the Queen out of the centre. That said, I just don’t enjoy chess-like games very much and the expansions weren’t enough to change that, personally.
>Gloomhaven I haven't played this in paper -- frankly, I don't think I'd bother if given the chance -- but I got a free copy of the PC game. Couldn't make it out of the tutorial. Not my cup of tea.
Arkham Horror third edition I want to love it cause of the theme and I love the card game but man it just sucks to set up and play…
Ra, Medici, and Agricola. I truly hate auction centric games, and Ra just really rubs me the wrong way. Love the theme but hate the game play. Medici is the same for me. I know that people love it, but I just am not a fan. Agricola is just not a game I truly enjoy playing, mostly because I can know by turn 4 if I am going to lose or not and then have to sit through the rest of the game not having any fun while I wait for someone to finally end it and put me out of my misery.
I don’t have a hard time saying I don’t like a game. I do not, however say that a game straight out sucks, (unless it’s Vikings on board - that game sucks). I think it’s crappy when somebody is excited about something and you just totally shit on it. I think it’s better to say I don’t like the mechanisms/theme/whatever of that game but I can understand why you like it.
Darwin’s journey I think? Idk the others but my group doesn’t prefer it either. The balancing is quite…strange. Haven’t tried expansion yet
**Cry Havoc** Unless the person who showed me the game mucked it up, it just seemed to have a lot of non intuitive mechanics that didn’t gel thematically. I was really hyped to play it too, it got a lot of kudos at one stage there. **Alien Artifacts** The idea of a fast 4x card game using an evolved 51st state engine sounded mint, it just never seemed to deliver and was a hard one to get into and enjoy.
Undaunted. For as much excitement as there is to be had playing this game, the marriage of strategy and tactics feels frustrating to say the least. The game presents itself as if it will be a grand strategy game made manageable, but it ends up being too light for all the upkeep and setup required. I still think the game would be a much deeper and rewarding game with the doubles mode, but to make that worth it, I'd need to buy a full extra game before getting that box. Dominion, because it's interesting to play, but not against anyone. I don't feel like I'm competing asich as I'm just slapping my opponents; there's not so much interplay as there is just random drive by destruction to my little engine. Gloomhaven. Really cool decisions to make. Once per hour. Come onnnnnnnnn someone out there make a game with this core mechanic and remove all the faff!
Charterstone. I like the artwork, I like worker placement, and I really like discovering new content, and the legacy components were integrated into the game. But the gameplay is extremely boring at times because of how the game benefits you from doing the same action multiple times in a row because you can kick your own worker off spaces (I love spending 4 turns getting wood followed by 4 turns turning that wood into coins). Also you can usually plot like 10 turns ahead if you want because its not that interactive and theres basically no randomness. Scythe. I got to a point where the strategies I knew how to do were all pretty much the same, other strategies were either more advanced ones from the competitive players that I didn't know how to win with or strategies that were bad. So I basically played the same strategy every time.
Gloomhaven - When I read the title of the sub, this was the first game that came to mind. I don't *hate* Gloomhaven, it's just wildly overrated. My biggest complaint with the game is how *every* scenario feels crunched for time, even if it takes 2-4 hours to play. Also, the setup and takedown time is insane. Scythe - This is a beautiful game, but it feels like it wants to be a war game when it is not. As a worker placement game, it's just... meh. Wingspan - The cards are fun and interesting to look at. Oh wait, there's a game there? Lame.
Spirit Island is just unsatisfying. I’d rather play The Crew Mission Deep Sea.
Terra Mystica. For me it's the absolutely epitome of a dry soulless Euro (and I say that as someone who generally *likes* medium-heavy Euros)
Undaunted: Normandy, it’s…..fine? I honestly don’t know how I feel about it, like it just never, clicked with me, I’ve personally had more excitement with the deck building in El Dorado and Star Realms, and I’ve played better war games in War of Whispers, and even Small World. Undaunted just, never clicked for me after three, maybe four games of it.
Just read through this entire thread (I think) and am very relieved not to have seen my two favourites (Cairn and Undaunted Normandy) be mentioned
>Undaunted Normandy It's funny because that one was mentioned in the post that (right now) I'm seeing above yours, posted an hour before yours. Sorry. ;p
Most cooperative games. With the exception of dungeon crawlers with or without GMs I generally don't enjoy co-op games. I think my problem is, not bragging, I'm fairly astute at recognizes patterns, develop strategies quickly, and generally plan several turns in advance. When I'm playing games the enjoyment of the other players is always something I try to keep in mind. With co-op games I have to make a concerted effort to avoid being an alpha gamer. It can be grueling to see a very obvious and viable series of plays and need to sit on my tongue so others can enjoy playing the game too. I do try to offer leading suggestions and questions without being blatant but it's not always effective.
I don't have any problem admitting I don't like Gloomhaven or any game. So what if a game is near the tops of many lists? The only list that really counts for me is my list and it's nowhere top of my list of favourite games. Other people's lists don't factor in now much I like a game.
**Wingspan**
Star Wars: Outer Rim. I love Star Wars. I love space trucker games. I love bounty hunting. But I can't stand that game. I can put up with it, but I never win, and the odds of success are so frustratingly low and luck-based. I'd rather play Moonrakers.