Category: Game Reviews

Was it fun?

yes the game was very fun, and the instructions were very straight forward.

What were the players’ interactions?

their was a lot of sabotage, every decision you made about what character you picked limited the choices of others. the assassin, thief, and warlord cards made it really fun because we started to know who had what card so it was more fun to kill or steal.

Would you play it again?

yes i would love to play, it is one of the few stratagem games that i really seem to enjoy. their were also a lot of cards that we didn’t end up using.

How long did it take to learn?

it was almost an immediate knowing of how to play after i read the rules, but over all i think the group took about 10 minutes.

Analyze the game using the 3-act structure.

their wasn’t much learning curve to the game to so the second act was most prevalent in this game, and the 3rd act was a very brief one because it may seem like one person was winning but then their can be so many curve balls thrown in with order of choice changed and with no clear circle of who plays next it was a very you don’t know until thieve already one type of feeling.

What is the collaborative and or competitive aspects of the game?

the competitive aspects of the game were very clear, with the king their was a competition for who gets to go first, and knowing that the game could change during every turn it made it even more a me against them than a bide your time type of game.

What is the game’s metaphor and which of the game’s mechanics standout?

very single card having its own mechanic made the game so fun, my 3 favorites were the warlord that can destroy anyone’s buildings, the architect because you can build up to 3 buildings instead of one, and the merchant because of all the mone you can get.

the tile game( i forget the name)

Was it fun?

it was very simple and fun.

What were the players’ interactions?

their weren’t direct interactions but any tile you could place could lead to someone getting eliminated.

Would you play it again?

yes but i don’t think it has the play multiple rounds at once because it is almost the exact same every time.

How long did it take to learn?

the wording was a little weird but it was a pretty straight forward game, about 10 15 minutes.

Analyze the game using the 3-act structure.

their was never really a third act to the game, because their were so many lines on the board it was hard to tell if someone would get eliminated by their play, most of the time was spent in the second act.

What is the collaborative and or competitive aspects of the game?

the competitive is the fact if your close to someone you can force them out if you play your tiles wright.

What is the game’s metaphor and which of the game’s mechanics standout?

none of the mechanics stand out to me, the only one that i think is cool is the fact you have to go to the end of a line and if someone else places them down you have to move too.

Was it fun?

yes

What were the players’ interactions?

it was very interaction involve because the whole game relied on us giving hint to each other about our cards.

Would you play it again?

i would play it again

How long did it take to learn?

it only took about 20 maybe less to learn.

What is the collaborative and or competitive aspects of the game?

the collaborative aspect is working together to make the free works, if someone were to sabotage someone by telling them different cards then it would just hurt everyone including themselves from winning.

What is the game’s metaphor and which of the game’s mechanics standout?

the mechanics of the rainbow cards being able to be used as either a whole other fire work to build or being able to be used as wild cards is a very fun and unique mechanic. i also loved the fact that you cant see your own cards, forcing you to trust the other players.

Was it fun?

I do think Pandemic was fun, although the aspect of reading a lot of rules and conditions in a game is often pretty daunting, it was interesting to see the different aspects of how we can win and lose in the game. I think what would make it more fun would be to win the game

What were the players’ interactions?

We spent a lot of time trying to plan out our moves before we decided to follow through with them. Collin made a lot of good choices throughout leading the team, but I think our flaw was just not fulfilled playing the game with confidence

Would you play it again?

Yes, though the irony of the Covid Pandemic was a little goofy, it is an interesting game to play and collaborate on

How long did it take to learn?

We spent about 15 minutes trying to figure it all out but got the hang of it in the first 10 minutes of genuine playtime.

Analyze the game using the 3-act structure.

Act one was primarily about us getting our roles and firsthand of cards, we went around and figured out what our roles allowed us to do Act two was when the game got into the spreading of the disease cubes, and we were losing a lot of confidence in winning. By Act Three we were succumbing to losing, which we did.

What is the collaborative and or competitive aspects of the game?

The pandemic is very collaborative! The only way to win is to team up and take out the disease cubes.

What is the game’s metaphor and which of the game’s mechanics standout?

“Can you save humanity?”  The biggest mechanic that stood out to me was only certain player roles could travel the board in specific ways, I have not seen that mechanic used in board games before.

I don’t remember what the games’ actually names are.

1. Was it fun?
   • The Firework Game was fun depending on who you play with.
   • Italian risk was so intimidating we didn’t even play. It seemed similar to Risk but tinier.
2. What were the player interactions?
   • In the Firework Game, players had to help each other choose the best cards to play in order to complete the firework card sets (they resembled Solitaire). The catch was you never see your own card until you play it! The game is all about your “verbal resources.”
3. How long did it take to learn?
   • The Firework Game was easy to learn.
   • The original directions for Italian Risk were in Italian. We never learned to play.
4. Would you play it again?
   • Maybe I would play the Firework Game. I would definitely choose others over it.
   • Definitely not Italian Risk
5. Analyze the game using the 3 act structure.
   • First Act was learning the rules and beginning to play. Second Act was developing a strategy with your teammates. Third Act was either completion of the “firework sets” or defeat (if the time ran out).
6. What are the collaborative and or competitive aspects of the game?
   • This game was purely collaborative. You had to help each other choose the best card to play without looking at your own. You all won or you all lost.

Amber Holt

What was the competitive/collaborative nature of the game? Tokaido was a competitive game where players competed to score the most points. Players also wanted to be the first player to complete certain actions so that they could earn more points than the other players, such as completing a panorama. It was also competitive in the fact that the first player who reached an inn gets first pick on the cuisine that they can buy. Additionally, another layer of competitiveness is added due to the fact that some spaces get taken up by other players and players must skip that space to the next available space.

What is the game’s metaphor and which of the game’s mechanics standout? The game’s metaphor is a travel throughout Japan. You collect souvenirs, food, and pay visits to a temple. One of the standout mechanics of Tokaido is the fact that the person furthest away from the end has to go first every turn and that determines the order of the players. I have never played a game with a mechanic like this and I thought it was really interesting, but hard to get used to.

Bonus Questions:

1. Three Act Structure
   • The first act would have been the beginning of the journey up until the first inn. At this time, all of the spaces and the actions required on them were unfamiliar and were still figuring out the order of players (more so that the last player in line goes first). By then, most players understood what their character’s special ability was and how they could take advantage of the spaces to earn the most points by the end. 
   • The second act would have been a majority of the “journey” that we took and all of the stops in between—visiting hot springs, making panoramas, collecting souvenirs, visiting the temple, etc—where, of course, players earned points. 
   • The third and final act would have been when we approached the last inn and began to tally up all of the miscellaneous points and award the bonus points. 
2. Was it fun? Yes, this game was really fun. I really enjoy these peaceful but competitive types of games. 
3. What was the interaction with the other players? Some of the player interaction occurred when players moved their player to the space of their choice, limiting where the players behind them could move to. For instance, some players took up the spaces where you collected coins and that created problems for some of the other players. Additionally, the first player to reach an inn, had the first pick at the food they bought, limiting the options for the players to follow. 
4. How long did it take to learn? The basic premise of the game didn’t take very long to learn but there were a few things that made the game experience harder to fully understand. It was definitely a learning curve having to have the player who was the furthest behind take the next turn instead of going in a set order. There were also a lot of different points that you had to keep track of that made it more difficult to leisurely play the game. 
5. Would you play again? Yes, I would definitely play this game again. I will probably say this about every single game I play this semester. 

1. Was it fun?
   • I would say that this game was fun, there was an aspect of luck when it came to drawing your cards so I enjoyed that. But sometimes it would be frustrating finding the cards you needed.
2. What were the player interactions?
   • The player interactions consisted of trading for other beans when you didn’t need them, and by screwing over other players by not trading with them so they have to plant a bean they don’t need.
3. How long did it take to learn?
   • It was pretty easy to learn, more or less just takes a second to pick up on the drawing and placing aspect, and when you get coins from gathering your beans.
4. Would you play it again?
   • Yes, would play again.
5. Analyze the game using the 3 act structure.
   • In the beginning, you are starting out with no coins and small bean plants. In the middle, you start to get coins, your bean plants get taller, and you possibly get a 3rd field. At the end of the game, everyone counts their coins and sees who wins.
6. What are the collaborative and or competitive aspects of the game?
   • Collaborative / competitive aspects include trading and making sure people don’t have their beans that they need.

Thoughts AND Ideas

Munchkin was fun as it went on but for a game that a supposed to be a shortened more straightforward version of D’n’D it has a lot of rules out of the box and its setup takes a while and a lot of reading just to get started. Also, some of the rules are not clear and need clarification to help the most basic players to understand. This is definitely a “Pick up and play game”. But I do like the option to either help a player or band together against other players or enemies feature. Which would either help the progression of the game or set everyone back to the start.

“DiXit” Review and Three- Act Structure

Was it Fun?

While Dixit is pretty simple, I find that super charming about it! I enjoy that it’s about art and interpretation, but also about how well your friends can be about giving simple hints.

What was the interaction?

Amber read the rules and explained the game super well, we quickly played it and enjoyed it, all wanting to play again so it was a very positive experience compared to Fluxx

How long did it take to learn?

It took maybe 5 minutes to learn, including setting it up and shuffling the cards

Would you play again?

Absolutely, I really enjoyed how simple it was, but how complicated it could be with who was playing

Act 1-

Getting the ropes of the game and figuring out how to play. We were a little confused on the voting aspect, but quickly got the hang of it

Act 2-

Once we realized we could be as vague or easy as we wanted with the hint we all got really into it, almost neck and neck with the points.

Act 3-

The game felt like it kinda ended abruptly, but we all enjoyed the points system, the voting and the art! 30 points to win does not feel like a lot though!

“Bang!” Review and Three-Act Structure:

Was it Fun?

 I believe Bang was a fun game once we got into it, though I was a little sad once we started to kill players off as they did not have a way to continue into the fun. I enjoyed the process of the game and how it was played. I can’t say in my experience I’ve played a game common to it.

What was the interaction?

It was a very “Who is the imposter kinda game, but we knew who the main sheriff was, but were dealing with the mechanics of the game within a smaller group. We would go up against each other blindly and that was an enjoyable feature.

How long did it take to learn?

Though we had Professor Ames carry us through the first round, we picked it up pretty fast. The rule book was super descriptive, and having a key helped everything make sense.

Would you play again?

Absolutely, I think playing all games again after their initial play makes the game even more fun, so I would 100% play again!

Act 1-

Our roles were laid out from the start, and learning how to use the other cards was our biggest task at this point. We had a lot of questions but we began to make moves with our cards that progressed the game.

Act 2-

Once we got comfortable and knew what to do, we started to strategically attack each other and decide who was good and bad. This is where things started to get into the cooler cards and we made choices on losing lives and saving lives.

Act 3-

This part was carried by Amber and Reese after I was killed off, when they decided to go back and forth with shooting each other, Amber won!

Amber Holt | Week 2

3 Act Structure: 

1. Act 1 – This was when roles and characters were being assigned and Ames was still guiding us through the game. We were just starting to get familiar with what the different cards meant and how you could or couldn’t retaliate to them. The attacks on other players weren’t really that targeted yet; everyone was attacking everyone to really get a feel for the game still. The time spent in Act 1 of Bang was significantly longer than DiXit, but still wasn’t the biggest portion of the gameplay. 
2. Act 2– This was when things started to heat up a little bit in the game. People were starting to figure out who may be who (besides the sheriff of course) and some people started to get close to death or even died. It still wasn’t entirely clear who had what role yet, and who may win the game. Especially since you can recover quickly with the beer cards, when someone got shot, it wasn’t necessarily an indicator that they would lose the game. 
3. Act 3 – Act 3 began when most of the players were totally eliminated and it was clear that there was only one or 2 possibilities that the game would end. For our game, it was either the remaining outlaw would kill the sheriff or vice versa. The act 3 for Bang is pretty distinct since you know that the end of the game could happen at any minute, but I don’t think it will be clear most of the time who will win. I think that the time spent in this act could significantly vary. For us, it was fairly long, but that was based on luck and the cards that were drawn every turn.

Bonus:

1. Was it fun? Bang was really fun. I loved the player interaction that the game had and how everyone had a different role and character to assume. It sort of reminded me of the roles that were added to Among Us as well as party games I’ve played in middle school. I thought that the dynamite card was so much fun too, just the fact that you could get blown up at any point in time was fun. 
2. What was the interaction with the other players? There was a lot of interaction with other players with this game. Any player could shoot the other players, if they were in range of course and the target player could either block that or they would lose a life. Players also had to try to secretly figure out who was in what role, trying to figure out who was on their side and who wasn’t. A lot of the cards directly force you to interact with other players, such as stealing one of their cards, shooting them, or dueling them. 
3. How long did it take to learn? The basic rules of the game didn’t take very long to learn, especially because it is similar to other games that I have played that involve roles. The hardest thing to catch onto was what the different cards meant, but it wasn’t a big deal because of the rule book and the reference cards. There were a bunch of weird little quirks that were also hard to catch onto at first, with some cards granting special abilities that players would keep forgetting about. 
4. Would you play again? I would definitely play this again and I think I might even buy myself a copy of the game because I enjoyed it that much. I think what makes it so replayable is the fact that you won’t have the same role or character everytime you play. 

Amber Holt | Week 2

3 Act Structure

1. Act 1 – This was when we were first getting familiar with the game. It took a few turns to really understand what types of clues were the most beneficial to give and earn points, since the point system is set up kind of strangely. Once everyone had been the active player one time is when I think the game transitioned into act 2 because everyone started to know what they were doing and how to strategize. 
2. Act 2 – This is when it sort of started to get a little competitive (as competitive as this game can even get). People were starting to think of really good clues for their cards and they were excited to get to their turn to share them. The majority of the gameplay was spent in this act. 
3. Act 3 – This was when we started to realize who was going to win the game. Whoever was closest to the end of the points scale at the time, it was inevitable that they would win because most players earned points every round. It was very evident at this point that Reese and I were very behind and would not win (we were extremely far back). 

Bonus

1. Was it fun? DiXit was fun. I thought it was a really unique game and I could see myself really getting into it with a funny group of friends. 
2. What was the interaction with the other players? The interaction with the other players involved collecting their cards and all agreeing to select a card that best matched the action player’s clue. 
3. How long did it take to learn? It didn’t take very long to learn at all. The directions were really clear and easy to understand. 
4. Would you play again? I would play DiXit again. Like I said, it’s a pretty unique game as opposed to other games that I have played so I think it would be nice to play every once in a while, but I wouldn’t say that it’s a game that I would want to play all the time. 

Was it fun? Yes, munckin was very fun once I started playing and understood what I was doing.

Is it interactive? Munckin is very interactive, it is all about sabatoging evryone else’s game whether you are stealing some else’s cards, levels or making their battle harder on them.

Was it easy to learn? Munchkin is easy to learn if you aren’t starting out with reading the instructions. There are so many pages of intructions to the point when we were half way through reading the instructions I couldn’t remember what the first page said. It is by far much better to start playing and follow the intructions on the cards. Then refer to the instructions if you need to.

Would you replay? I would defiently play this game again, just maybe not against certain people lol.

3 Act Structure

Act 1:

The game took a long time at first to get started because the instructions were very long and wonky. Once you start playing it is still hard to keep the game flowing because not only do you have to keep referring back to the intructions but you also have several cards that you cannot use in the beginning because there are other cards that need to go with it in order to be played.

Act 2:

We finally started to get a hang of the game and the rules started to make sense. We all started gaining levels and you can tell who was trying hard to win. The game started to get a little competitive at this point.

Act 3:

Everyone started to play their sabtoge cards against each other to try to steal each others levels to win the game which eventually caused a major dispute that lasted about 20 mintues. The game unfortunately resulted in a tie because it was never finished before class ended.