It was good to see the voice of reason in the shape of Mr Thomashow last
issue. His thoughts
on Magic are almost certainly spot on, which, together with input from
other hobby
luminaries, helped me adjust my admittedly warped view of the subject.
I am not fully cured,
and you'll certainly not catch me playing it, but suffice to say I was
getting all bitter and
twisted about Mr Garfield's creation. You noticed! Why? Not sure really.
Perhaps years of
seeing very good to excellent games go unnoticed and largely unpurchased,
trying to push
them for all I was worth and then seeing a barely average game come along
and enjoy
astonishing success was way too much for my depleted enthusiasm. Overreaction
probably,
but it just got to me for some reason. But that is not all. I think the
collecting aspect, which
as Mike Clifford rightly said is the key survival element, was clearly
too close to home.
Further, withholding rares was just too cynical a marketing device for
my conscience. Add
in the clusters of card swap nerds (what is the collective noun? a narrative?
a sadness? a
slobbering? And why do they all have eyes like Ray Liotta?) and you have
a phenomenon,
combined with Avalon Hill's retrenchment and a generally duff year for
games, that was quite
depressing. It has actually got to the point where my favourite game shops
have to be checked
out before entering in case the anals are there, droning on about bleedin'
Ice Age and absurd
card prices. Boy would I love to see a market crash. Enough, the blood
pressure is rising
again.
While consciously avoiding coverage of Magic in Sumo, it is now hard to
get away from its
influence. As mentioned, most game shops have become Magic trading posts,
at least four of
the big conventions (Eindhoven, Essen, Origins and Gencon) have been tainted
in varying
degrees (and it will get worse in the short term -- even the roleplayers
are moaning) and
magazine content has been affected (including Sumo!). And in the background,
Wizards of
the Coast are spreading their surplus funds around in what could easily
be a sinister fashion.
Allegedly. We have already lost the quality of Ars Magica, we are foisted
with boardgame
bilge like Robo Rally and Dalmuti, doubtless with more to come, and the
organisers of
Origins have fallen to the mighty mana dollar. Whether it is possible to
buy talent and market
share or not, we shall have to wait and see.
The counter argument is that, with their profligate advertising, support
of cons, free
tournaments and high profile, they are indirectly helping the rest of the
hobby -- certainly the
sorely pressed gameshops, riding their much boosted revenues, have little
to say against them.
This is, as they say, a view. I just have this nagging doubt that all this
is not selfless
philanthropy. I also wonder why WotC are seemingly treated with adoration
and commercial
respect, while Games Workshop, a hugely impressive and far more talented
organisation, are
given nothing but grief. At least Workshop have established a business
track record and don't
have rare categories for anything (though in fairness, their games' `rarity'
may be retail price
determined).
I am frankly amazed (watch out chaps, he's still moaning) at the positive
reaction to the bulk
of the new collectible card games -- are we in computer game territory again,
where for some
reason they are judged by different criteria? Let's take the painful example
of Wyvern, from
US Games Systems (but there are many others: Star of the Guardians, Dragon's
Wrath, Rage,
Galactic Empires and Echelons of Fury). Apparently months (hours surely?)
in preparation,
rated very highly by the magazines and its designer (well, yes it would
be
), the game has
reportedly sold very well. Having seen the rules I charitably assumed there
was more to it
when you played it. Having played it, my opinion of this game is that it
closely approximates
Pelmanism in strategic options and is about as exciting. Yes, the dragon
artwork is pleasant
and the game is different from Magic, but it is still unadorned snot. Quite
why gamers have
been enthusing over this I have no real idea. I can perhaps understand
unscrupulous dealers
saying, and I quote, `Oh yes, it's another great card game, probably better
than Magic' to the
poor saps who listen to them for advice, but let's get this in perspective.
Without the artwork
and the collectability, this would hardly raise a gamer's interest. It
is on a par with those card
games one is obliged to play with young children. Avoid, and when your
favourite dealer sells
you crap like this (as a game, not as an investment), let him know you
aren't happy.
Sim City -- The Card Game has staggered out at last. On the upside it is
surprisingly true to
the original computer game and relatively inexpensive. On the downside,
it lacks any
discernable strategy, is overlong, boring, remarkably fiddly, you get railroads
that go into
lakes, the poor photos don't work for overall impact, the colour coding
is bad enough to cause
eyestrain, the rules are among the worst I've seen, there is no explanation
of how to actually
start play, the card mix is barmy, the overall feel is poor and only a
moron would want to
collect all 500 cards. Finally, you get a picture of cuddly Darwin Bromley
as the mayor. Not
to put too fine a point on it, Sim City is an awful game. I suspect only
familiarity with the
original PC title will encourage sales once word gets out, but this in
itself should be enough
to prevent a commercial disaster for Mayfair. And as producers and promoters
of the 18xx
series, I guess we are grateful for small mercies.
I think the general problem is that Mayfair were on a loser from the start.
The difficult task
of reverse engineering a computer program has not come off and the failure
has been
compounded by losing the spirit and unique strengths of Sim City 2000.
What they have
designed is a card/board game that retains the `toy' element of Maxis'
design philosophy (ie you play with the city,
it's not really a game) but removes all the non-competitive,
and most
of the creative, appeal of that concept. Worse, it has vestigial computer
elements in the shape
of the constant calculations and the myriad bonus checks. A computer can
do this in
milliseconds, we mortals take a while. And computers don't get bored. I
have sympathy with
this design flaw, as I for one have found it is only too easy to drift
off into overly fiddly math
models to crack a design, only to realise that no-one is actually going
to want to play them.
The last straw is that the game may just have worked as a straight card
game, like Express
say, but once the spectre of collectability was introduced, it was all
up. Basically, there are
too many cards to get a decent game out of two boxes (£12) as there are
too few seed cards
and too many `multiples'. Either way, it is hard to believe this one was
18 months or more
in development, has Tom Wham on the design team, and actually involved
the Mayfair boys
(and wives and kids) trooping round Chicago with their Box Brownies. I
for one was
crushingly disappointed, but most of all I feel sorry for Maxis who have
had their huge
achievement somewhat discredited (but then they should have watched where
they sold the
licence). Where does the blame lie? As publisher, part-designer and developer,
it is the big
accusatory finger for Darwin Bromley, though others will doubtless be called
to account.
Which is all a bit sad really, when you think about it.
As you know, I did have great hopes for the card games avalanche, but all
we have, with
three or four exceptions, are games that even I could conceive in a lunchtime.
I'm sure we'll
get some benefit from the second generation stuff (perhaps Star Trek expansions,
Star Wars,
One on One Hockey, Shiloh (just available from ARDA), Eagles:Waterloo,
or the new WotC
titles) but is it worth the pain? Just as depressing, given the thousands
of card game players,
is the lack of original ideas and variants. Where are the workable multi-player
rules? The new
cards? The radical designs? Nothing. All that seems to happen is the players
buy like idiots,
think like sheep and play one on one, not actually demanding any innovation
or departure
from the One True Path. As an example, WotC's new release, Ice Age, is
essentially Snow
Frosted Magic -- that is the extent of the prevailing creativity. Meanwhile
other companies and
magazines line up to feed the addiction with products that beggar belief.
Believe me, the
games yet to come are growing by the week and, ominously but predictably,
look like rank
upon rank of clones, with perhaps the odd exception here and there. We
even have a
fascinating title on Good vs Evil to cater to the Bible Belters, which
smacks of hypocrisy to
me. I suspect this is the way it will be until market saturation is reached
and the whole thing
collapses in on itself. I promise to stop moaning every issue about all
this, but I think it needs
to be said. Good card games or developments only reviewed from now on then.
Okay? And
for goodness sake don't spend too much money on these little packs of cards.
The Spiel des Jahres nominations for 1995 are: Buzzle (Franjos), Condottierri
(Eurogames),
Maulwerf Company (Ravensburger), Die Siedler von Catan (Franckh), Galopp
Royale (Gold
Sieber), Kaleidof (EG), Linie 1 (Gold Sieber), LaTrel (ASS) and Medici
(Amigo). As ever,
this selection runs the gamut from amazement through grudging acceptance
to immense
pleasure. One assumes Gold Sieber are permitted two nominations for showing
up. And sadly,
no High Society or Phantoms of the Ice -- small boxes, so not enough hot
air, I guess. Out of
interest, I am told that Buzzle, a word game I think, is designed by the
old Eon team who are
back on the case -- can we have some information on this one please? I'd
like to find out
where they went for fifteen years.
Okay, so I was wrong. I had distinct trouble with the Sumos last year,
and if I'd been thinking
straight I should have gone not for ten games, but settled instead for
the number I thought
deserved it. The game I am now 99% sure didn't warrant the acclaim is 6
Nimmt. I'll admit
I was duped by the designer, other gamers and hype into thinking this one
was a good game
that I couldn't work out how to win. Understandably (?), I have confused
this with there being
precious little game to tackle and loads of luck. And I am not alone!
Housekeeping Matters: The back issue situation remains largely unchanged,
with 19
completely sold out. 20/21 and 22 are in stock but all others are out
of print and staying that
way, unfortunately. Having had a clear out I have tracked some older issues
down, but only
a few. If you need any let me have a cheque soonest, bearing in mind all
past requests have
been dealt with, but by surface mail where appropriate -- a mistake, sorry.
On Retros, I am
now very low on issue 1 and have around ten of issue 2 left so the same
advice applies. As
a result of the worrying depletion, I am considering a PC disk(s?) of all
the text files for
issues 1 to 18, perhaps 1 to 23, in the major WP formats. This would include
everything I
have, including Inside Pitch, general waffle and lettercolumns, but sadly
not everything as
some contributions came in on paper. I will also be considering uploading
the whole lot to
Ken Tidwell's Game Cabinet (by this I mean I will be sending a disk to
Ken who will do the
hard work). Please let me know if either of these is of interest and if
the demand is there I'll
add it to the To Do list.
Index: There are a couple of subscribers working on a comprehensive index
for Sumo (this
would have been made easier if I'd numbered pages early on -- sorry) which
if they come to
anything I will try to make available. I already have Paul Jefferies' sterling
effort for issues
1-8, but these should bring it all up to date.
Rules Bank: An excellent response on the recent titles from those of you
who do, much
appreciated by those who don't. Mike Schloth, Ken Tidwell, Bob Scherer-Hoock
and others are now hard at it with the computer
translation programs and Chris Mellor/Merfyn Lewis,
John Webley and the rest still crank them out manually. As ever, I don't
know where we'd
all be without them. Thankfully, the rules do seem to be appearing much
more efficiently than
before -- perhaps the increased commercial interests of some US subscribers
are having an
effect? We still need rules for the list that is hidden somewhere abouts,
and I need some help
on the Rules Bank because it remains a giant pain, yet one I still consider
important enough
to continue.
Phase 1 of the general plan, which has worked so far, has been to divert
some of the demand
onto the Internet and other outlets. As a result, there are now Rules Bank
branches at Ken
Tidwell's Game Cabinet, at the good offices of the SFCP press and even
from Just Games.
You have no idea how helpful this is, and I am very grateful to them. Each
of these fine
gentlemen (and Jocelyn & Naomi) should have a good electronic selection
of the more
popular rules and you should feel free to approach them to establish terms
and conditions --
either way they will not charge anything more than a nominal sum to cover
costs. If they can
help, great (Ken for one presently has more rules than I on disk), if not
come to me. Or come
to me anyway if that is easier.
Phase 2 is to make the more obscure rulesets the subject of a slower rules
service, perhaps
once a quarter until natural phase-out occurs, while vastly improving turnround
on the recent,
much more popular, rules. I intend to achieve this by getting as many of
the recent rule
translations as possible onto PC disk, either by scanning, typing or converting
from existing
files. This should enable me to circulate the above branches and also to
print off rule requests
and send them back much more easily. If you request both new and old rules,
I will try to
send new first and follow up with the rest. I hope this helps with the
speed problem and gives
you all a better service.
But I need some help. Partly on contributions -- keep them coming -- but
primarily on typing,
and for that I need some volunteers. Basically, I would need sets (usually
a few A4 pages)
of hand written or poorly printed rules typed verbatim into a word processor
(almost anything
will do, though WordPerfect 5.1 or ASCII files are preferable, but it must
be IBM PC Dos
or Windows compatible). You would then send a disk to me, I will do some
layout and
incorporate the file into the Rules Bank. I do not expect a flood of applicants,
but if you are
willing to help, and have the odd spare lunch hour with a PC or underutilised
audio secretary
in front of you, I'd be more than happy to hear from you.
Phase 3 is going to cause some raised eyebrows, but I feel it needs tackling.
In the early days,
there were large numbers of contributors to The Rules Bank, largely balanced
by the
withdrawals, and it all seemed quite equitable. Now, it is supported almost
entirely by half
a dozen individuals who give up time, and in several cases, large amounts
of money to
produce rulesets. These rules are circulated at cost to users of the bank,
including commercial
ventures who then sell the games, and without this effort we would all
doubtless be in
difficulties. While I have no intention of affecting the market by withholding
rules, I would
like to redress the balance. I would welcome thoughts from shop owners
and rules bank users
as to how we might reward the rule providers (not me, I hasten to add).
It might be as simple
as the odd free game, or a one-off cash collection, or perhaps a regular
payment that I would
pass on as fairly as possible. I'd be interested in your views.
Cor! What a crop of games we've had! There have been at least half a dozen
rather good
games this Spring. Pick any one of High Society, Medici, Siedler von Catan,
Condottiere,
Linie 1, Paparazzo or Lords of the Renaissance, and you'll have a game
that would make
anyone happy.
Jeez! What a load of rubbish we've had! There have been at least half a
dozen rather poor
games this Spring. Pick any one of Billabong, Galopp Royale, Canaletto,
Sim City, Wyvern,
Kilimanjaro or Edge City, and you'll have a game that would make anyone
depressed.
Sorry about that, the new releases seem to have polarized into those for
which one has
admiration and those that might have conceivably been knocked off on a
wet afternoon. They
also neatly set me up for yet another, `Why pay out over £100 and get this
pile of rubbish'
introspective. I except Kilimanjaro from the general abuse as it is marketed
as a kid's game,
and is apparently somewhat bastardized from the Knizia original, even if
the graphics by
Doris are a front runner for best of the year. The result is a game so
heavily based on luck
and memory that one almost forgets how good the movement system is. Either
way, one has
to wonder how games like this still emerge from the German market, especially
from Hans
im Glück who, with Waldmeister as the turning point, seem to have nosedived
recently. Given
how hard it is to sell even a good game and bring it to market, how on
earth do these duffers
get through? And don't get the impression I am complaining about complexity
or weight, the
German family deserves better, as do we.
I commented last time, rather favourably, on Herr Knizia's High Society.
Having played it ten
times or so more since then, I'd like to upgrade the excellent rating to,
umm, a Sumo award
in May. Now there's an honour. As far as a light game goes, and in the
sense of having no
flaws, this one is perfect. Different every time, very difficult to win,
quick to play, a variable
and sudden finish and chock full of decisions. This is a really clever
slant on bidding systems
and Hols der Geier (where would several games be without that basic idea?).
Brilliant. Go and
buy one now.
You'll note I used the P word up there, denoting perfection, flawlessness,
excellence (and no
doubt definitude and virtue if my thesaurus is to be believed). The Great
Adjective Purge of
1991 removed my arsenal of excellents, brilliants, wonderfuls, superbs,
greats etc for all but
deserving cases. Since then, I haven't used the P word very often, if at
all, in relation to
games. This links neatly with my ongoing thoughts on great games and a
discussion, with the
human namecheck himself (Mike Clifford), who was a little surprised that
I consider that
there is no ideal, perfect game out there for me. I'm sure Chess, Go, Draughts
and other
abstracts are close, or even there already, but I am deprived that pleasure
due to a mismatched
brain. Within their remit, as examples only, Hols der Geier (eight years
old already) and High
Society are perfect in the sense of having no flaws, but I am looking for
the
computer/middle/heavyweight game that isn't currently available: perhaps
the Despot of Iain
Bank's Complicity, the Siedler or the Britannia that works perfectly (so
that every gamer
playing them smiles like a cherub), SimCity 2000 or Transport Tycoon without
the
restrictions, 1830 without the time drain and the shortcomings.
Alan How listed his requirements for a good game last time and I found
them rather
interesting. I was also privately impressed that he had sat down and actually
thought them
through. As with art, I know what games I like but I have never attempted
to empirically
assess exactly why. In many ways, I am not sure it can even be done as
I've always seen
boardgame design as more artistic than scientific. Certainly both the systems
and aesthetics
are usually subjective. Also, every game is different and tackles the same
problem in different ways. For instance, I
obviously wouldn't rule out a two player or a non-interactive
system for
that reason alone, but it would need to be good. Anyway, ever one to rise
to a challenge,
particularly one from an accountant, here are my guidelines (in no real
order): 1) Multi-player.
2) Interactive. 3) Max 2 hour playlength. 4) Atmospheric systems. 5) Largely
Rationalisable.
6) No Perfect Plans. 7) Good Graphics/Components. 8) Lots of Decisions.
9) Lots of Events.
10) A dollop of chaos. 11) Challenging long and short term aims and strategies.
12) Depth
and variety.
Ah, an interesting diversion. Back to the plot. However much you think
about it, there is no
game, anywhere, that is perfect. If you push me for those that come close,
I'd have to say pick
any one out of this lot: Modern Art, Metric Mile, Daytona, Railway Rivals,
Sechs Tage
Rennen, Heimlich & Co, Wildlife Adventure, Elfenroads, Liar's Dice, Bausack
or Acquire.
You'll note a preponderance of short, light games there -- clearly easier
to get right than their
bigger cousins. Oddly, I presently have faith in less than half a dozen
designers to come up
with The Big One, but there is always the guy from left field to pin my
hopes on. Perhaps
Courtney Allen, Merk Herman, Richard Berg, Sid Meier or Joe Balkoski will
design a game
on potato farming or, more likely, Hartmut Witt or Klaus Teuber will finally
produce that
killer game that we all know is lurking in there.
If you think I'm mistaken, I'd be pleased to hear why and which game (s?)
you will nominate
as your champion. And I say this not as a transparent Siggins patent `Get
the lazy sods to
write in' controversy, but as something I believe in and have been consciously
holding back
from these last five years. One of the things currently keeping me
going in the hobby is
that nebulous, and probably futile, search for the Holy Grail of gaming.
It doesn't exist, but
I'd like to think it will eventually, and then I can retire just like Indiana
Jones did. Well, for
a while anyway.
Medici was also reviewed last time by Dave and I have to agree with him
entirely. It is easily
the best of the year so far, and unless we get a bumper crop from Essen,
likely to remain
there. Again one wonders how Reiner Knizia manages to design these clever
games,
seemingly one after the other, with such originality, tough play criteria
and strong themes. We
may well be talking genius here. They are also characteristically achieved
with the minimum
of components and fuss -- but if Medici has an imperfection, and the same
applies to some of
the other New Games of Old Rome (Medici is a tweak of Mercator), it may
be related to this
sparse, over-too-quickly, feel. It can also be a little dry, and perhaps
slightly prone to `Do
nothing and trust to luck' -- I doubt however whether this is a winning
strategy. My feeling
is that as good as this one is (and don't get me wrong, Medici is a strong
contender for top
honours everywhere), it is a little too much a sub-system looking for some
weight, not
entirely comfortable with its `stand alone' status, and, to me, a missed
opportunity. By this I
mean if the mechanism were combined with a wider system, thinking out
loud -- something
like Fugger -- we might have a two hour trading game that would knock most
rivals for six.
However, while Reiner designs only games at less than an hour and in the
slightly abstract
mould, this is what we can expect to get. What a terrible hardship, eh?
Paparazzo is another good, if slightly derivative, game. Like Medici and
Modern Art, it
requires you to place value upon items without a price tag. I happen to
rather enjoy that
pursuit, and feel that, in the right company, it is one of the more testing
and rewarding game
mechanisms. Perhaps this is why Herr Knizia returns to it so often. I am
not sure that this one
carries it off as well as, say, Medici or Falsche Fuffzigger, and it is
undoubtedly far weaker
than Modern Art, but for a little game it packs a big aftershock. By this
I mean the first game
will probably not impress. There is too much to learn and quantify for
you to do well, and
more to the point you don't enjoy it much. The feeling was that the game
only nearly works
and the theme, selling photographs to magazines and agencies, could have
been a lot better.
Nevertheless, the second game is a revelation. You are acting on heuristic
information, can
grasp the second level strategy and at least have a pop at a winning gambit.
The payout
mechanics could be clearer and the game is too fiddly and ambitious for
a small box item,
but it is worth a try. If I were being hard, I would ask why bother to
closely emulate and
tweak successful systems unless your version is better? The answer is,
I presume, that the
designer and publisher think Paparazzo is an improvement on the games already
on the
market and so is worth doing. I am not so sure. On a soft day, I'd say
this is one to explore
as long as you remember it comes in a small box and you can have two for
the price of one
big one.
Bakschisch is the first of four games from Gold Sieber that will be commented
on
immediately below. In truth, while the four matched boxes look impressive
stacked on the
shelf, I doubt any of them will stay there for long. All of them contain
a lot of air, and sadly
there is no outstanding game amongst them. That said, with one notable
exception, they really
aren't too bad either. Bakschisch is one of the nearly theres but it fails
badly on depth,
replayability and price. An amusing little movement and bidding system,
that reminded me
a little of Ravensburger's Karawane, is spoilt by a slight `so what' quality
and a one shot
system that you really aren't going to want to play again. It is basically
a variant on the old
`In the Fist' bid system merged with a Hols der Geier positive/negative
auction to determine
movement. It is quick, fine for late night duties, but hardly sparkles
with invention. If
Bakschisch had been in a small box with a £10 price tag, we'd have all
been quite pleased.
As it is, I think it offers far too little for a big game and a big price.
While on Bakschisch, I suppose we should be getting all intrigued as to
who the mysterious
Kara Ben Hering is. The painter (Vernissage), erstwhile pugilist (Knockout)
and
pseudonymous designer of Bakschisch would no doubt wish to have us all
eagerly discussing
the conundrum over meals, at the bar or round the gaming table. However,
I really can't be
bothered. I assume it is Teuber, or perhaps Panning, but what a dismally
tedious stunt this is.
Linie 1 is something of a mongrel. A sort of Railway Rivals/Drunter & Drüber
cross breed,
it has a character all its own yet no discernable pedigree to make it a
class winner. But
enough canine analogies, you'll be thinking this one is a dog, which it
isn't. The basic idea
is that you build a tramway network using tiles (like 18xx pieces, but
square and with tasty
graphics) connecting your two termini with three prescribed locations
in the city. Once you
have connected everything, you declare yourself ready to race your tram
from A to B, visiting
all three destinations. The first one to do this is the winner. The kicker
is that your terminii
and destinations are initially known only to yourself, so there is an element
of bluff while
laying tiles (but not a lot). The main problem is, perhaps obviously, with
varying degrees of
bluff, route difficulty, luck and available tiles, you are all going to
finish the laying phase at
different times. And yes, the player who finishes his network first has
a major advantage in
the race.
I have played Linie 1 four or five times now and while it clearly isn't
the greatest game ever
construed, it has much merit as a fun filler. For some obscure reason it
had a friend of mine
nearly popping his hernia with laughter (true!), largely due to my tram
entering an unspotted
endless loop with no prospect of escape. On several occasions I have seen
a confident player
set off, only to find his track incomplete or including a `lobster pot'.
It certainly works well
with older kids and stands on its hind legs begging (sorry, dogs again)
for a game end tweak
to make it just that little bit better. Mr Dagger, you're on. My only thought
was that you
might get a dice or point bonus for declaring first, but the race start
would not be staggered -- shifting
the emphasis to a tidy network rather than speed building, while
retaining the bluff.
The problem is, essentially, that while the tile laying is interesting,
the `secret' player identities
can never be all that secret, the luck of your stipulated route is a little
heavy handed (half the
time someone else builds your track for you) and, worst, the game ending
race is a complete
anti-climax. Only once has there been any doubt over who might win once
the track has been
declared, and only once did a player declaring second actually win. Nevertheless,
the best of
the four (and the proper way to pronounce this one seems to be Linea Eins,
not Liney One
as we yobbos would have it).
Sternen Himmel reminds me of Boomtown with a dose of Mystic Meg: a game
of placement,
calculation, bluff, gambling and a modicum of memory management themed
to the heavens.
In play, it neither appealed greatly nor disappointed and is rather dry
and studious in feel -- too
much poring and not enough chat. Which is, I suppose, pretty damning
on balance. But
it isn't horrible, is certainly worth a try and has some clever ideas in
there. Steve Owen will
have run through the mechanics elsewhere, but what I liked was the extremely
strong
theming. The constellations all play an important part, the mechanics relate
to galactic events
such as black holes absorbing stars and themselves, binaries doubling your
score and even
time shift in the form of the face down counters. Very nicely done, shame
it wasn't a bit more
exciting. By the way, it is much better with three than five -- more players
means less control
and an unacceptably slower game. A take it or leave it game, but do try
to play it. On
balance, much less fun than Boomtown but of the same light school.
Galopp Royale is the last of the four Gold Siebers and, when it is all
boiled down, really
pretty poor. A marginally original but imperfect bidding system and a `come
first or, if not,
last' race does not, and should not, justify a £30 price tag or a Spiel
des Jahres nomination.
This is embarrassing stuff, more so coming as it does from Klaus Teuber
(who should have
stuck the nom de jeu on this one and gone with Bakschisch for glory). A
fellow reviewer once
told me that he sometimes came across games that were so lacking in merit
he found it
impossible to write anything about them. This game triggers much the same
reaction in me
and I will not be drawn into wasting much time on describing its mechanism.
Why? Because
the auction system is badly flawed (too little information available to
preclude luck) and roll
a dice and move doesn't constitute anything that should be bought, let
alone be up for perhaps
the most prestigious award in boardgaming. As you know, I have nothing
against light games,
but they have to be good. This isn't and if you buy it, you only have yourself
to blame. What
on earth were Teuber, Gold Sieber and the Spiel des Jahres jury thinking
of?
Franjos's Billabong is, even to a man who has long since given up reviewing
abstract games,
a bit of a disaster. Boring, totally obvious and I can only conclude with
completely hidden
depths, this is another one that bagged a Spiel des Jahres nomination last
year. What is going
on? How can the likes of Airlines, High Society and Phantoms be left off,
while games of this
standard make the list? Is there an element of tokenism on behalf of the
smaller companies?
All you clever dicks can now write in and tell me what I've missed.
Maulwerf Company is the lightest game under review this time, but unlike
Galopp Royale
which is very light but duff, this is very light, clever and original.
Each player is given a team
of moles (and you will see no cuter dobbers this year) with which you have
to try to win the
annual golden shovel competition. The moles are placed at random on a triangular
grid
interspersed with several mole holes. Each turn you flip a card that shows
you how far one
of your moles may move -- in a straight line. If this enables him to drop
into one of the vacant
holes, that is ideal because once all the holes are full, the entire first
layer of the gameboard
is lifted up and those moles sans holes are eliminated. The next level
is thus revealed with
a random deployment of our short sighted friends, but less holes this time
and only enough
for roughly half to make it to the next level. And so the game progresses.
The first mole
down the solitary hole on the fourth layer wins the golden spade. The game
is quick, fun and
amusing when your surface moles cannot move, requiring a comfortably holed
mole to vacate,
while avoiding the rush from rival moles ready to take his place. If you
are considering
purchase I'll stress that this is VERY light, with minimal strategy, suitable
only for 3am
rounding off duties, or ideal for kids I would guess. A definite no-brainer,
but a fun no-brainer
nevertheless. Again though, Spiel des Jahres material? And a better
representative for
Ravensburger than High Society?
Canaletto is an oddity. One, quite rightly, expects a lot from Hans im
Glück these days, and
Canaletto isn't much at all. It isn't a disaster, but it is so plain and
unassuming, and has so
little new to offer, that one wonders if they are struggling to find the
next big success. The
game is basically Knizia's Tutanchamun core `collecting' idea with a bidding
system and price
mechanism grafted on. And the graft was conducted inexpertly and unnecessarily.
Add in a
needlessly involved mechanism to decide the next auction and graphics so
poor as to be
confusing, and we have a game that is really going nowhere fast. I like
the idea of being able
to decide the next auction and the known future sale values are interesting,
if highly gamey.
More generally, it strikes me that we see a bit too much of this `take
a bit from here, a sub-system
from there, add a bidding system and a new theme, tweak it up a
bit and stick it in
a big box' approach. Sometimes Derivative Design Technique works (High
Society, Asterix,
Razzia, Daytona, Grand Prix Manager (!)) and sometimes it doesn't (Canaletto,
Bakschisch,
Linie 1, Dalmuti, Musketiere, almost any Mille Bornes rip off, and most
of my designs)
The deciding factor here, in a game that would otherwise be almost purchasable,
are those
graphics. By any standards, they are muddled, unappealing and amateurish.
Probably by the
same chap who `designed' the Sunday league cricket gear.
You don't tend to find much out of the ordinary these days. So when I recently
spotted an
oddly shaped box containing a Canadian cyberpunk boardgame with hex tiles
and lots of
enticing box blurb, the long dormant `Obscure Boardgame = Immediate Purchase
For Sumo'
circuits came back on, blinding my `Don't Impulse Buy Again' program, and
I was £30 worse
off in fairly short order. Which is a shame, because the game isn't that
good. It's hard to
believe this theme is overdone already, but once again it is roaming around
an urban sprawl
and hacking into computers. Perhaps the most faithful non-RPG rendition
of cyberspacy type
pursuits so far, it is nevertheless lacking in decision making and is not
a patch on Steve
Jackson's Hacker as far as systems go. Again, not an entirely horrible
production, but so
swamped with modifiers, clumsy rules and inelegant systems that I quickly
realised why £30
spent on almost any German game is going to be a better bet than a
science-fiction title
designed by some bozos with ideas above their station. The title is Edge
City, the company
is Imagineering Design, and you will be buying my copy if you have any
decency left in your
body.
There has been a deathly silence on the four new Gibson's sports games
which have been
spotted in various shops recently. At £12 each and, like that dire earlier
boxed series, full of
air, they can't have been exactly racking up thousands of sales. Has anyone
played them,
because I'm certainly not buying them. On the contrary, the `buzz' game
of recent weeks
(ignoring Siedler, Linie 1 and Medici for a moment) has been Ransom. As
Yogi Berra said,
``It's that déjà vu thing all over again''. You'll excuse a hint of
incredulity here as not only did
I alert you all to this one ages ago, but there was also a short review
in Sumo 14. There is
no smugness in my comment, just surprise that it has taken so long to permeate
the gaming
community. Is it the second edition artwork? Or the fact that it now has
wider distribution?
Either way, well worth your time as a short filler or opener (but it still
doesn't fit back in the box).
Avalon Hill are inadvertently causing some merriment around the hobby,
partly through the
once great General (which I will no longer buy because it is so embarrassing)
but mainly
through their corporate strategy, as we leaders of industry say. It seems
they don't know
where to `focus' their talents. PC games, card games, boardgames, family
games, wargames,
ASL, Pog; the world is their lobster, but no-one knows which way to turn.
Either way, most
of the design staff we know and love seem to have itchy feet, so all this
is probably academic
anyway. Whatever their focus this week, they have a number of new boardgames
coming
along, most of which were reported last time by Stuart. The only new arrival,
apart from
Solitaire ASL, is Empire of the Rising Sun; basically Advanced Third Reich
in the Pacific.
Those of you who have been reading The General since, what, the late 70's?,
will wonder if
this is the same one that has been mouldering away in the AH dungeons.
It will no doubt go
down a storm with the 271 people who still play the system worldwide. Geronimo
has sadly
slipped again and it is unlikely we will see it here till late Summer -- I
genuinely hope this
one gets out before something nasty happens, as it inevitably will. Meanwhile,
to keep the
Monarch Avalon stockholders happy, you can buy the ASL Annual at a whopping
$26 (my
Captain Scarlet annuals never cost this much) or a crate of 1830 Snap Caps,
``12 Historical
Caps for Railroad Buffs''. I have no wish to describe what Milk Caps are,
or indeed Pogs -- if you don't know,
you unquestionably don't need to. I can see these, `Look at the Schmuck
on That Camel' (I kid you not) and `Watch for Falling Rock' just flying
off the shelves into
grateful consumers' arms. With stuff like this, some would argue it's a
good thing AH are re-focusing away from boardgames.
While browsing around at a miniatures show in Newark, my mate pointed out
a stand selling
a variety of small metal cars. There were not only 1990's racing magnets
but also proper cars
like Maserati 250s, Blower Bentleys, D Types and sharknose Ferraris. The
mouldings are
good enough for the scale, but not top quality, suffering most in the thin
tyre department
(which look a bit wobbly) and the bodywork is rather pitted -- just like
those Isopon Escorts
driven by 17 year olds. Anyway, with a bit of work they paint up nicely,
make a pleasant
change from the modern stuff and are ideal for game design bits. The cars
come on bases
which measure 25mm x 12mm, almost spot on for Grand Prix Manager among
others, and
there is a good range from the 30's, 50's, 60's and 90's already with more
coming. Both F1
and sportscar subjects are covered. They cost 70p each, less in volume
I would imagine. If
you are interested, I suggest you give SDD a call on 01902 654164 or write
to 40 Coalway
Rd, Wolverhampton, WV3 7LZ.
On the same stand, and complementing the cars, was Winner's Eye View, a
gamekit
production of a motor racing system which the designer believes is, `the
most enjoyable multi-player board game
ever produced'. Well that's as may be, but at £20, even
with metal bits and six period cars,
it is £5-£10 overpriced (thus offering a healthy, no doubt
thoroughly deserved,
profit to the modest designer), but looked interesting enough for me to
sample. On opening
the package, my heart sank as everything pointed to a Formula One clone
and SDD having
re-invented the wheel. This is partly understandable as, despite being
active in a related
hobby, the designer had not come across Formule Dé, Daytona or even Speed
Circuit. I
haven't yet had a chance to play this one, but will report back next time.
The new Virgin Games Centre is now well established in the main megastore
at the East end
of Oxford Street. The range of games isn't bad, but there are far less
overall than the old shop
and precious few fluffies and magazines. The worrying thing is the section
given over to
collectible cards, which seems to grow by the week, and the old problem,
a lack of
knowledgeable staff. Ask them how many rare cards there are in Jyhad and
you're in luck.
Ask them about a quick multi-player boardgame for beginners and they recommend
Third
Reich or Empires in Arms. For both range and advice, I know you'd be far
better served
spending a quid on a tube ticket and heading up to Leisure Games on the
Northern Line or
walking to Just Games.
There have been a number of recent conversations identifying `old favourites'
that, however
well treated in the bullpen, are not quite as we remember when summoned
to pitch on the
rocky mound that is the gaming table. [Sorry, I appear to have `Verbosity'
turned up to 11
today.] A very good example is Drunter & Drüber that was recently pulled
out as a closer
and, well, it disappointed much as Bruce Sutter did in his latter days.
[And `American Sports
Elitism' too, apparently] It was clearly not the same game as when most
everyone raved and
it won Game of the Year. Similar cases are legion: Kuhhandel, Jockey, Elefantenparade,
Holiday AG, Deal Me In, Ausbrecher, Banana Republic, Elixir, Totopoly,
Speculate, Armchair
Cricket, Moviemaker, Colditz etc. This is not a general malaise as for
every `good' game that
subsequently disappoints, there is one that stands the test of time: Wildlife
Adventure,
Favoriten, Election, Flying Carpet, Heimlich, Indiscretion, Shocks & Scares,
Seaside Frolics,
Alaska -- all of these have been out after a long vacation and worked fine,
some even better
than the memories indicated.
It is difficult to say why this is. Probably the initial appraisal of some
games is completely
wrong, or at least mistaken, but I feel it is more a function of time and
the effusive nature of
the fluffy hobby, for which I admit I am partly responsible. It is of course
possible that the
first few playings (but not always the first), seasoned with a heavy sprinkling
of novelty, are
always better. It may also be that many of these games are neither designed
to cope with
extended play nor the rigours of game groups rather than families. However,
the real danger
is in pre-hyping and over-estimating titles. Take Dicke Kartoffeln, Extrablatt
and Full Metal
Planete. Three games that received hugely positive receptions and seemed
to ride on their
initial enthusiasm towards classicness, classichood, even classicosity.
Now look at them. I
doubt any of the three has been out of the box in the last two years and
if they did emerge,
I'm pretty sure they'd disappoint (though this should really be tested!).
Add to that a steady
forward movement in game design standards and exposure to quality new work,
and you start
to form a picture.
In a flurry of belated activity, Avalon Hill's 1830 has been played seventeen
times since
Easter and I have enjoyed every one. I am only now starting to realise
how the stock market
should be played and it is also, by the hour, dawning on me why you lot
seem to rate it so
highly. I now know it isn't my cup of tea, but I can see exactly why it
is yours. At heart it
is far more gamey (excuse the pun) than I'd imagined, and bears even less
relation to railways
and real life than I knew before I came out with my cavalier 18xx: A Case
for Redesign? piece all those years ago.
I had been sitting there thinking it was a semi-realistic
railway game
and have always played and experienced it as such. Of course now I see
it isn't at all, and this
is why I have always subconsciously railed against it. When you see some
of those ludicrous
late-game track layouts my delusion is so obvious as to be painful. In
case you think I have
finally cracked and handed in my Impeach Marathon Gamers button, this is
in fact the
Computer Bit. Full review of Avalon Hill's milestone this issue. Elsewhere
in silicon land it
is a bit quiet. We await some mouthwatering titles from Microprose, Bullfrog,
Avalon Hill
and Maxis (these four are shaping up as the major quality players to my
mind), but the big
draws have slipped further and further back on the release schedules. We
still await all the
promised new Sim games, Blackbeard, Beyond Squad Leader, Advanced Civilisation,
Little
People, Command & Conquer, Quake and Star Trek, and while Syndicate Wars
and Links 486
are trouser wetting stuff, they won't be around till early '96. Meanwhile
I have had to make
do with XCOM 2, Pizza Tycoon, Arcade Pool, Microsoft's Complete Baseball
CD (which
neatly replaces about a yard of stat books) and several repeat plays of
Transport Tycoon -- did
I mention how good this one is? Not exactly the end of the world, all things
considered. End of Computer Bit.
Last year I waxed lyrical about Het Spel, a wondrous Dutch gaming publication
that bit the
dust after just three issues. Somehow, I had the feeling it was just too
good to last. I am about
to accord the same rave review to Vae Victis, a recently launched French
magazine, which
I hope has rather more longevity. Unfortunately for most of you reading,
it is slanted mostly
towards the wargame and figure gaming hobbies but I mention it in case
any of you, like me,
enjoy the odd crossover read. The benefits are many: superb layout and
graphics, fascinating
articles and rules, page after page of gorgeous colour pictures and even
a game in each issue.
The drawbacks are language, availability and price -- around £5 an issue
in France, but worth
every centime.
May I just mention Interactive Fantasy magazine again? Thank you. Completely
ignoring the
fact that issue 3 sees me warbling on uncontrollably about narrative and
atmosphere, this
really is a good read and you are likely to find more of interest about
game systems in
general than anywhere else. Try it.
Finally on the media, you should look out for Steve Jackson's regular Saturday
games slot in
the Telegraph. While far too short, it is better than nothing and usually
features a lead story
on something topical (even that underexposed game Magic got a look in)
and a couple of
reviews. Whether you wish to expose yourself to the delights of Mary Kenney
by reading the
rest of the paper is up to you -- as my mate once said, ``In The Telegraph,
even the children's
letters are written by old fogeys'' -- but in fairness, Bloody Mary aside,
it is much better than it was.
Finally, two items of late breaking news from Richard Breese and White
Wind (bit of a
gusting link there -- breeze, wind?), the latter first. The limited edition
game for 1995 will
definitely be Elfenwizards, a multi-player game concerning the election
of senior magician
types. All flowing of robes and pointy of hat, no doubt. Alan indicated
that there may also
be a couple of smaller games as well, but this is still under review. Can't
wait! Meanwhile,
Richard Breese, like many of us a very busy chappie, spoke to me about
the gamekit awards
some months ago with a view to filing a late entry due to work pressures.
As with most of
the other promised designs nothing materialised and I largely forgot all
about it. I'm
embarrassed to say however, true to his word and putting many others, myself
included, to
shame, he has now produced Keywood, a multi-player game with a number of
interesting
systems which you can buy right now. For this act of skill and endurance,
we should all be
grateful because Keywood is original, well tested, fun and has an excellent,
logical rule set.
A timely lesson for Mayfair, on balance, considering that Richard is a
one-man band.
Keywood has an unual theme. The idea is that your people follow you to
a new land, run by
the mysterious but benevolent Keywood, wherein you must make a life as
a farmer or
tradesman. Of course, even Arcadian realms have politics and finance, and
it is in the election
of councillors, competing for trade licences and struggling for income
that the game really
starts to motor. As you'll have gathered I have recently played the game,
in virtually final
form, and it is really rather good. It runs around 90 minutes, supports
3-5 players, is very
interactive, full of nicely combined bidding and voting systems, with a
hint of light-hearted
negotiation, and really works well - a true gamer's game which I think
is going to sell out the
limited run very quickly, just as History of the World did. All things
considered, this is
exactly the sort of thing I wanted to see and Richard has almost single
handedly made the
effort worthwhile. Keywood comes boxed with very presentable components
(Richard's
annoyingly talented sister has produced the artwork and wooden pieces are
included) -- in fact,
it is a gamekit only in the sense that it will be a limited run production.
I can say no more
until next issue, when I hope there will be a full review. Meanwhile, send
a cheque to
Richard Breese for £16.50 inc UK p&p, £17 (Eur), £19.50 (USA)
at 19 Norman Avenue, East Twickenham, Middlesex TW1 2LY.
It has been a trying 1995 so far. The Great Dust Debacle effectively took
out three months
of the year and I am only now, nearly five months later, returning to normal.
For those that
asked about the problem, we still don't know for sure what caused it, and
probably never will,
while I have ended up with re-activated hayfever and damaged `olfactory
senses' (as they used
to say in D&D) -- the old schnozz is way too sensitive, which the doc says
is a permanent
condition. Great. This means musty paper and cardboard, aerosols, solvents,
exhaust fumes,
glossy paper treatments and cigarette smoke cause me considerable discomfort.
There are
certain games and books that are now off limits, I am having to tread very
carefully when
painting figures and Essen is going to be interesting with its smoke and
dry air. Again, not
the end of the world, but I could have done without having large holes
made in my main hobbies.
Otherwise, work remains a constant worry and the irony of Stuart Dagger
taking the reins so that I could have a rest
is high in my mind. I am many things, but rested is not one of them.
I have seen no films since last time, but would very much like to see Bullets
over Broadway,
Judge Dredd, Waterworld and The Madness of King George, and have read but
three books,
ignoring those instrumental in my reading up on game design ideas. The
best of the three,
worth it for the pictures alone, was the sumptuous Napoleon (Proctor Jones,
Random House).
William Boyd's short story collection, Nathalie X, comes a creditable second
and Brian
Sewell's Reviews that Caused the Rumpus passed a couple of train journeys.
TV remains a
low-key time consumer, with only HIGNFY, X Files and NYPD Blue remaining
must see
items and, coincidentally, admirable scores in Scrabble. Mike Clifford
raised the inevitable
challenge recently, claiming NYPD to be the best ever. Personally, I still
have a lot of time
for Hill Street, Northern Exposure, Between the Lines, St Elsewhere and
LA Law, but the old
buffer may just have something here.
I also very much enjoyed Simon Schama's Landscape and Memory, which while
somewhat
rarefied at times and suffused with flagrantly intellectual references,
still offered much to
entertain and inform. I especially enjoyed the Arcadia episode, a theme
that has been evident,
and welcome, in several areas recently. Meanwhile, Absolutely Fabulous
was a huge let down,
with perhaps one or two laughs per episode, and The Wild West, potentially
the best concept
of recent months, fell foul of whatever it was (shallowness? lack of analysis?
that relentless
drawling commentary?) that made The Civil War equally dissatisfying. But
the biggest let
down of all, after last year's triumph, was Sharpe. I have said before
how poor are the
underlying books, which fundamental weakness came home to roost with a
vengeance. With
credibility out the window, lacking decent plots and with no villain as
strong as Obadiah, it
only took Sean Bean proving beyond doubt he is no Dustin Hoffman to cause
deep
disappointment. Oh well. Top CDs were Echo & The Bunnymen (surprisingly
good after all
these years) and Into the Eighties -- Department S, Martha and the Muffins,
Jam, M, Smiths, Heaven 17: Wunderbar!
Mike Siggins