The Long View: Innovation
22 August 2012
3 Comments
The Long View
In this episode of The Long View, I am joined by W. Eric Martin of BoardgameGeek News to discuss Carl Chudyk’s Innovation. In addition to exploring this fascinating game, Eric shares his thoughts about game fatigue, trends in the hobby, and “game snobbery”.
Thanks, as always, to 2d6.org for hosting and supporting The Long View. Thank you for listening!
~ Geof Gambill
Geof Gambill
Latest posts by Geof Gambill (see all)
- The Long View: Android: Netrunner - May 8, 2013
- The Long View: Ra - April 22, 2013
- The Long View : Police Precinct - April 9, 2013
- The Long View: Glory to Rome - April 2, 2013
I really appreciated the discussion on the “return on investment” in games, and in discussing Eric’s post on Hidden Depth.
I happen to be in the “I like FluXX” camp, to the tune that I think there is more to the game than it is given credit for. Yes it’s random and chaotic, by winning the game consistently (or at least more than the other guy) has entirely to do with controlling the chaos and knowing when to unleash it.
I feel the same way about Lost Cities. I’ve played well over 100 games of it with my wife, and still find little subtleties and nuance in play that in an otherwise “simple and light card game.” There is more depth to the game than its surface belies.
Also, Eric’s take on reviewing games, particularly about recognizing the merits of different style games and importance of evaluating a game based on an self-understanding of the reviewers preferences and expectations is right on. I find Eric’s perspective to be really mature and honest and right on the mark about the direction and value of deeper criticism.
I sometimes feel that the elusive gamer “snobbery” has the perception that there is some epitome game that is out there and that games are better/worse based on their proximity to this zenith. The reality is that there are many many different reasons play games and different games that satisfy those reasons in better and worse ways. Recognizing this is crucial to effective criticism.
This was a great podcast.
The talk about theme was very interesting. Looking at the cards and such there isn’t much visual theme. But I think there is theme in the feel of the game and in how some of the abilities work. You do feel like you are moving through time and how the new technologies not only obsolete the old, they change the game and the “world” only to become obsolete to the next generation of tech. Carl brought up some of the observations in how the abilities work and how that is thematic in a way as well. It was a nice way to look at theme with this game.
I also liked how you talked about the expansion. I had some of the same thoughts when I played it. It takes a chaotic game and makes it even more chaotic. The echo effects were just way too much. However the new rules seem to put a more reasonable handle on it and I would not have even been aware of them had that not come up in the discussion.
Your guest had a nice perspective on the game. You both seemed to agree on everything and I know I criticized your cast on the Quarriors episode because of it, I think that when you are both positive on a game and you getting to a deeper level of discussion it was fine.
I think you were able to get at some things with this game that were very interesting and that I really hadn’t thought of or considered and that to me is the mark of a good quality.
Great job!
Thanks for the feedback from both of you! I appeciate it. I agree, Oliver, that personal preferences are very important when looking at a review or assessment of a game. There is not just one “mountain”, but many, and each type or style of game or “mountain” may have it’s own peak. I think people tend to be dismissive of mountains they don’t want to climb! I usually look at games as situational. Depending on the people I am with, the time I have, and the preferences of the players and the occasion, I will choose different games to play as optimal for that situation. Others may refuse to play such games outright or as a point of principal in that they do not feel they are interesting enough for them. That’s totally fine, but, in my opinion, it is limiting. Limiting experience, limiting social opportunities, limiting enjoyment that may be gained through the human interaction, even if the game is as “silly” as Eric’s darling Fluxx!
Murad, I return to the theme from King of Tokyo and Quarriors. Sometimes, less is more, and Innovation is, in my opinion, a complete experience and excellent game design in its original form. I worry sometaimes about expansion “bloat” and return to my original assertion that a game should be complete out of the original box. I find that I enjoy Echoes, but I usually end up returning to the original base game before too long, and I believe it may be enough for me as is. Expansions……… Hmmmmmmmmm….. Still not sure about them in general. We may discuss this more in a future epiode about Race for the Galaxy. Stay tuned!
Leave your response!
Sponsors
Follow Us
Recent Comments
Recent Tweets
Staff
Affiliates / Friends
Online Gaming
Podcasts
Board Game Publishers
Role Playing Game Publishers
Meta
Most Commented