Category: Game Reviews

1. Was it fun?  Yes, I felt like the game was entertaining and enjoyable! I have a soft spot for playing plant-based games, and the unique pieces and art made the experience more enjoyable! The game included an adorable comic about the story behind the characters in the game (A panda and a bamboo farmer) so the added lore to the game was a nice touch.
2. What were the players’ interactions? Like most games, diving into a game with quite a few pieces and a very specific rule and guideline book is always a little intimidating, but I’m super biased at this point and will always agree that Amber does a fantastic job of explaining the rules and assuring the game is played. Although there was one rule, we didn’t realize was incorrect until the game was a fair way through irrigation channels, we eventually agreed to play the game (still incorrect) but as we were before.  The most difficult part of the game was completing the tasks we needed to get points, but it was super fun once we got the hang of taking turns and fulfilling task cards.
3. How long did it take to learn? I would say about 10-15 minutes, Amber was super concise with the rules, so questions were asked, and as far as the basic understanding we started the game quickly, learning a bit on the way and getting the hang of it by the mid-game.
4. Would you play it again? Absolutely, this game is so so fun and cute and I was actually trying to find it over the weekend to buy it!
5. Analyze the game using the 3-act structure: Act 1: Establishing the game, the pieces, and the idea of task cards. This beginning was not as rough as some beginnings of games can be that I have experienced. It was all about placing tiles and getting tasks at this point. Act 2: At this point, we all started to focus on completing tasks, the difficult part is deciding which task to do, as some are more complicated than others. Act 3: This is where it was sort of obvious who was winning and who was behind. I had focused a lot of time on one task, which I believe was my downfall. Collin ended up winning with lots of points, as he focused on getting as many tasks as possible completed.
6. What are the collaborative and or competitive aspects of the game? The game is highly competitive, with players trying to get the most points from task cards, but it is also collaborative in a way, as certain moves you can do, such as placing tiles, or choosing where to move the panda can help other complete their tasks, on purpose or not!
7. What is the game’s metaphor, and which mechanics stand out? In researching the meaning of Takenoko, which means “Bamboo child” – referring to the strong bamboo sprout that can grow 1.5 inches in an hour. Takenoko is about growing and spreading regardless of barriers that might attempt to prevent one’s growth. Throughout the gameplay, we never ran out of bamboo, even though we removed a lot of it from the board by “eating it” as the panda. I think the mechanic of never losing a feature of the game, no matter how much is going on, really brings not only the metaphor to life but also an aspect of never being done with the game.

Was it fun? I thought so but I think it might be frustrating for some.

What were the player interactions? Your choice of tile placement may either help or hurt your teammates.

How long did it take to learn? For the original game, not long. It was relatively easy to learn (under 10 minutes)

Would you play it again? Yes I would.

Analyze the game using the 3 act structure. In the beginning of the game, players chose their color, learned the game and placed their first tile. During the middle of the game, players begin to expand their empire, learn strategies, and build alliances or enemies. The game ends when the tiles run out and players count their points based on the tiles they placed throughout the game.

What are the collaborative and or competitive aspects of the game? The goal of the game is competitive; however, there may be collaborative aspects depending on specific gameplay. Players may help each other out with tile placement.

What is the game’s metaphor and which of the game’s mechanics standout? The metaphor of the game is to be the ruler over as many building towns, roads, and farms as possible. A mechanic that makes the game interesting is the requirement to randomly pull then immediately play that tile; this often forces the hand of players.

Was it fun?

Yes, Tsuro was an interesting yet simple game that I enjoyed since it was a game that relied on knocking other players out of the game by making their piece go off the edge.

How long did it take to learn?

This was the quickest game for me to learn, only taking about 5 minutes to figure it out by reading the instructions.

What were the player interactions?

The player interactions consisted of us yelling at each other when we make a good piece placement because it knocks the other player off of the board.

Would you play it again?

Yes, 100%

Analyze the game using the 3 act structure.

In the beginning, it starts of slow with pieces moving little by little. In the middle, the game starts to pick up and pieces start moving more and more and someone gets the dragon card. In the end, it only takes one or two turns for the game to end by everyone knocking each other off the board quickly once the board fills up.

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

This is a very competitive game, since everyone is playing against each other. But there are also collaborative aspects by seeing what pieces other players are putting down, and placing your piece according to that.

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

The metaphor “The path of the dragon” shows that you are supposed to choose the correct path of the dragon, and there is only one correct path in the game; the winning path.

1. Was it fun? Yes, this game was fun. I enjoyed the mechanics of this game, it reminded me a little bit of Catan, which I haven’t played in YEARS. The bamboo pieces and the art was super cute too. I love these Japan themed games!!!
2. What were the player interactions? The player interactions were influenced by the actions that players made on their turns. For instance, if someone placed a certain color plot in a certain area, that may mess up other players’ cards for earning points for the layouts. Also if the players moved the panda to eat certain colors of bamboo, it would also mess up other players for completing certain objectives. Since this was an entirely new game for all of us, we also tried to help each other out a little bit, helping to guide each other’s moves for their turns. 
3. How long did it take to learn? It didn’t take very long at all to learn. The mechanics aren’t super complicated, and they are similar to other games. Although we realized about halfway through the game that we had misunderstood a part of the directions and were technically playing incorrectly so learning the rules wasn’t totally smooth lol. 
4. Would you play it again? Yes, I would play this game again, especially since now I know how to properly place the irrigation channels as the game intended. 
5. Analyze the game using the 3 act structure: The first act would have been the initial rounds of the game where we were still learning the rules and mechanics. This would also include the building of the game board itself because tiles were only placed during people’s turns. The second act would have been when we had a better grasp on the game. This is when we started being able to complete some objective cards and figured out how we could maybe affect other players by placing certain tiles or eating certain colors of bamboo. The third act would have been around when Colin got 6 cards. We knew that once he completed the last card that the final round would begin and he would get special points for that. It was pretty evident that no one else was going to reach 7 cards before him, but we were still a little uncertain about who would actually win, although Colin was very likely to. We then counted all of the points on our objective cards and sure enough, Colin won.
6. What are the collaborative and or competitive aspects of the game? This was a competitive game. Players competed against each other to complete 7 objective cards and whoever collected all 7 triggered the final round of play where players had the chance to complete as many remaining objectives as possible. The winner was based on whoever had the most points according to their completed objective cards. 
7. What is the game’s metaphor and which of the game’s mechanics standout? The game’s metaphor is a panda who is essentially taking over and eating a bunch of bamboo and a gardener is sort of trying to stop him. They included a comic to tell this story which was super cool!! One of the game’s mechanics that standout to me the most is having to roll a die to determine the weather conditions for your turn. Different weather conditions mean different things and all give you a different advantage for your turn. 

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!