by bk375
By that I mean the game is designed such that if you want to improve your ability to win, you search and improve your equipment (to the fault that the game becomes very difficult to lose if you try to win). In any reasonable discussion of a board game I have had, making moves that help you win is playing well and making moves that decease your chances of winning is playing poorly (intentional or not). The game is designed that good play is to search and improve equipment and poor play is to not improve equipment and kill zombies and level up.
You may say for you playing the latter way is more fun and that's fine. There is no cooperative game that I would consider well designed that I have to purposefully make moves that sabotage myself to make the game either challenging or enjoyable. Every good cooperative game provides a reasonable level of challenge and tension with players trying to make the best moves to win.
I will conclude by saying I can tell from some of the responses that people really enjoy this game, and it seems to me that is very directly proportional to their tolerance for playing a game sub optimally to artificially create tension and game flow. I really think there is nothing wrong with that and its good dialog for future potential consumers to understand the circumstances under which they might enjoy this game. However, I will say there are a number of games that I find fun (maybe I like killing zombies, or dragons, or I like the artwork or the color of the box or its so bad its good, etc.) that I can recognize are poorly designed and my enjoyment is derived from something beyond the game design. I would just ask you to think whether your defense of the game is based on it being fun to you or your belief it is well designed and balanced.
longagoigo wrote:
bk375 wrote:
Fair enough and I definitely have stopped playing. That logic begs the question though if I play the game the way it was designed and its boring, is that on me or the designer?
For me, I'm not going to enjoy a game for very long if I have to generate game balance and tension by consciously playing poorly.
longagoigo wrote:
Take the fight to the enemy, if you want excitement. If the way you play is boring, then stop playing that way.
Wait a second, 'if I play the game the way it was designed'? I believe most of those who have fun with the game are playing it the way it was designed. Taking the fight to the enemy is not playing poorly, but instead requires you to play well. Also, I said stop playing 'that way', not stop playing.