On Hating a Feast for Odin & the follies of reviewing board games....
Вставка
- Опубліковано 11 тра 2024
- This is not a review for A Feast For Odin. It's more of a cautionary tale... #boardgamer #boardgames #tabletopgaming
Affilliate Links:
A Feast For Odin | amzn.to/44FmVGF | www.gamenerdz.com/a-feast-for... - Розваги
Man, a 8 year old game being called dated makes me feel ancient ;)
Great points about this folly we call board game reviewing. I think there is a place for reviews after a few plays, that's most of mine, as long as you don't present your opinion as fact and the be all and end all of things. I don't think anyone clicks on one of my normal reviews and expects to see a detailed thesis into the game. Reviews are not strategy guides after all, and you are right. Your audience and you tube want the frequent engagement.
Some channels over-egg the emotive language, and then a lot of channels aren't much more than kickstarter hype folk. Where its not really a review, its a hype package, and i suspect the channel that sold you on a game you don't play is one of them.
Because it is never a reviewers job to sell someone on a game. If someone watches our review and goes "wow, yep, this ain't for me" that's just as good as someone saying "wow, i love it", better even, as we ,ay have just saved someone money.
Anyway, i balance this all out by sessions each week to play older games, and not for review purposes. I get in my 3-5 plays for my reviews, that's work, and then go play spirit island or Arkham horror for fun.
Keep making thoughtful content!
I really appreciate the thoughtful response. Interesting subject to dive into is what it means for a game to be dated? I suppose this is subjective but certainly has been my bias for me to overcome since getting into the hobby. This is why I am going back to the "classics" to see if they hold up for a person that did not grow up in the hobby with them and has been poisoned by a culture of hotness and crowdfunding.
In general the vast majority of my perspective on games is cemented at around the 3 play mark. I do think there are some games that have a type of depth that isn't made obvious in a few plays. I actually just found this playing Gaia Project this week. I really struggled with "getting it" and in the spirit of this video pushed through looking for why this is rated so highly.
I actually just watched your video recently to see if I was missing anything. Like in a Feast for odin there are levers to pull that require a multistep strategy to get to and the benefit of which are not particularly apparent. Gaia clicked for me last night as I finally scored over 100 points on BGA vs the autuma, still lost but finally found out how much more fun the game is when I started to pull the levers in the right order. At the three play mark I was still frustrated, maybe I am slow but that was my experience. Similar story for Brass (if you can't tell I am working on a Network building video), Barrage came a little quicker.
I think the vast majority of games are ok to talk about after a couple plays but I am also very interested if the same game is still in the reviewers collection and how many plays it has gotten while sitting on the shelf after a year or so. Thanks for watching!
Great video and good points. Feast is definitely a game that takes a while in order to improve. In the first plays it looks like you won't be able to ever accomplish what you set out to do! But it's so rewarding when you finally improve your gameplay and fill in all those islands and sheds and your main board by the end of the game :) - I 100% agree, way too many games we don't give enough plays to truly appreciate the grandeur. I try to slow down my purchases and ensure I give as much plays as possible to the games I already own.
Thanks for watching and I appreciate your thoughtful comments!
That's what makes it not rewarding and a waste of time. The islands. Just get islands and get income up, and everything else is easy. Filling two islands or two different islands doesn't feel different. Just an activity more than a game. Over rated af
You’ve inspired me to give Feast for Odin another chance. I generally prefer games with tighter decision spaces, and I’m not a huge fan of Uwe worker placement games, but within that set, I think I like Odin the best.
Yeah I think the polyamino aspect helps to elevate the dryer worker placement resource management of Agricola/Caverna.
Took me about 10-15 solo before I got ok. After my first play on big against a real person taught me all of what you learned on the forums. I really appreciate this video. Thank you.
appreciate the kind words
Great review! Makes me want to give the game a shot on BGA. I agree on spending more time with games, I’m to the point now where if I buy a new game I have to sell an old game to keep my collection at the size it is (100 games not including expansions). I’ve also been replaying games a lot more & enjoy that more than reading rule books & learning new games all the time
Yeah I am trying to trade to get new games as much as possible to keep the collection tight. More and more I am realizing how silly it is for me to get games and not play them.
Excellent points. Thanks for sharing When a person has only so much time for board games - what do you do when you own so many games that you don't have time to play them 'enough' or even play them once? But, wait, there's more - so many NEW games coming out every month, to consider, purchase, and maybe play.
Concerning - Feast for Odin - I bought it due to the high ratings. Note - I only played it solo. It never clicked with me, even after 10 plus plays. Even with the amazing number of choices available, after picking a certain tactic the good choices dropped a lot and then choices seemed pretty obvious to me. Also, it required quite a bit of set up and table space. I sold my copy. You mentioned Arnak. I much, much prefer Arnak. Course, it's in my Top Ten.
Yeah while this wasn’t a true review of Feast, I will say it feels a bit dated and convoluted. Up against some modern offerings that have the benefit of being developed 5-8 years later I think it might fall back a bit. I still enjoy it and feel like there is still a lot to explore after 15 games.
One solution to this is to play with different groups of people. Each person/group will tend to hone in on different things. Playing with different groups means you see different perspectives on how others approach the puzzle of each game. I know that my weekly group plays very differently than some of the monthly groups I am a part of, and the same game can feel very different. I'll also see people trying different strategies. It's not always easy to find multiple groups, but definitely changes the perspective a bit.
BGA helps with this a bit. The other problem I would imagine is getting a group that wants to play the same thing over and over.
Often times this happens to me when I play a rule wrong as well, making the game too easy or too hard.
I typically play most games wrong the first time :)
Great video. My wife and I experienced a similar thing with Great Western Trail. We made a video on our channel that talked about how we first bounced off it, but then came back to it after a few months, and it hit different. Sometimes it takes other games to alter your approach to a game. That's why we're playing through our collection and documenting our journey.
Have you tried the Norwegian expansion for A Feast for Odin? Possibly spoiling our review long before we get to it, it is almost a must have expansion in our opinion. It is almost a 2.0 upgrade, and we don't play or teach the game without it.
yeah when/if I do a proper review it will certainly have Norwegians included. I play alot on BGA and wish it was included there. GWT is certainly a favorite for me.
I love Uwe games, AFFO isn’t one of my favorites but still enjoy it. The game is also a LOT better with the Norwegian expansion.
For strategy, yeah counterintuitively your home board doesn’t provide great bonuses and has a lot of wasted spaces. So a viable strat that I often do is get the 2 income quickly then go get a bunch of islands and ignore my home board completely until the last round or two just to cover the negative spaces (which you can do without filling the rest of the home board). Also I try to get a lot of points from boats/emigration and utilize pillaging a lot. Of course, if there’s too much competition for these things to make it inefficient then I pivot to other things.
I like that you articulated the plight of the reviewer. There are too many games so you either go wide (playing a bunch of games 1-2 times) or do narrow and deep (playing a handful of games, maybe even just one, dozens of time). Both have pros and cons but I think the former approach is more incentivized, which means reviewers and content creators often only have a superficial understanding of the games they talk about which can be unsatisfying and even cause tension for players who are fans of those games.
Thanks for watching and the thoughtful comment. I have never tried to ignore my home board completely until the end. I will try that today. Yeah I think the vast majority of stuff we hear on UA-cam are largely superficial takes. It’s a symptom of a free content model in a niche that can’t get many adjacent non game sponsorships. Being in this side of the camera I have sympathy and interest and why it’s happening. This takes a lot of work and to do it consistently well is a job.
The Feast for Odin is more of a tedious activity than a game. The game is available on Boardgamearena... so possible to play a lot before a review.
Yeah that I where I have been playing. The only problem is no Norwegians expansion which is critical from what I understand.
@@Neon_Gorilla I rather watch paint dry than play it, after two turns I gave up 🙂
You have played Gang of Dice on BGA? Amazing push your luck dicer.
@@diamondmeeple never even heard of it. Thanks for the suggestion!!!
Definitely do not envy board game content creators for the reason you discussed. I don't like buying games that I don't think I'll keep playing for a long time, but that is just my personal opinion. But I also think a great game should be great the first play. I remember feeling such great tension in Dune Imperium; I remember the hilarious interactions from Hansa Teutonica. If a game isn't great immediately, then I don't know if it's "worth" your time to keep trying to grow into a game when there are other options out there.
It's like when people tell you to play an MMORPG like Final Fantasy 14 or World of Warcraft, but you gotta get past 100 hours of story before it gets really good. Maybe when I was a teenager, but not nowadays.
But anyways, more related to your content creation, I like the deep dives even if they aren't popular or good for the algorithm. What if you did videos that compiled 1st impressions and 5th impressions of games? Then, further if you dive deeper. Keep some notes throughout your plays and make a video separating your thoughts.
I appreciate your comments and suggestions. I certainly tend to agree that great games often reveal themselves immediately.
I think it is rare but certainly happens that some games fall flat on the first play and then reveal themselves to be great as the player understands how to make the game work properly. ROOT is one that comes to mind along with some of the heavier euros especially Lacerdas.
I do like your ideas on seperating impressions and deeper dives.
Yep. I find myself reviewing reviewers, sort of.
Considering for example, whether their dislike of a game (or love of it) was based on too few plays (they often say so, or imply it at least).
I like your honest appraisal of this so, Subscribed! 😃
Also, both AFFO and LRoA are in my fave games list.
Appreciate you watching and the sub. Yeah I think short sighted reviews are a plague to our wallets :) it is tough to know about the number of plays but I do think it should be something that is disclosed during the review.
I like your video. Great production and interesting take play more games. I wish reviewers were more transparent about how often they played a game and at what player counts. I understand everyone wants to grind out videos, but I try to play a game 3-4 times AND IMPLEMENT DIFFERENT STRATEGIES before I rate how much a like a game. I can't stand when a reviewer says "x" action seems under/overpowered and I don't have a sample size of games.
I agree with you while heartedly. For me the fun in games are exploring strategy. Unfortunately I think the culture on UA-cam is mostly concerned with the new toy to play with. I will say I suffer from the same thing though.
I never played Feast for Odin, and never intended to do. I don't know why, this game doesn't speak to me. Every aspect of it tells me don't buy me, don't buy me.
Great review, You told some points that push me away.
I spend 5/6 plays on a every new games ( some little exceptions here), and If I don't like it after that amount of time, I sell the game.
I think that is a fair try for personal use. I just think if you are going to review something and especially give it positive reviews that may influence a person to buy you should probably have given it an extended look.
This was my feel with Caverna, I've been itching to get back to that game to give it another chance, and noticed I got into a research hole on A Feast For Odin as if buying that game and selling Caverna would solve my issue with Uwe games bahaha.
1. I only played Caverna once
2. I played with 5 players and everyone was learning the game for the first time
3. I lost
I'm gonna play it at least 5 more times this year before I make a decision to keep it long term and invest even MORE time into it with a new core 3 people group I have or to sell it to finance something different.
oooh boy 5 player learning games sound like a special type of hell I don't want to visit:) my wife bounced off caverns very hard early in out BG journey but I liked it well enough.
I had the same reaction to FFO. I think combined with a bad teach, and playing with others that really knew what they were doing just spoiled my first play and left a bad taste in my mouth. I started playing it again when it went to BGA and had the same journey as you did and really began to like it and see why so many people love it.
Content creation has gotta be crazy wanting to crank out the new stuff, but still trying to give an honest review. Feels like its almost an impossible balance. I have trained myself that I try and not buy any of the hotness, but wait and see what is still being talked about 6+ months down the road. Hard for creators like you to do that when you want to take advantage of the hot new games that come out for clicks and views.
It comes down to the question of what is the best return on investment, deep dives or becoming a channel where you are an expert on a few different games and you mostly focus on those. or spreading things out amongst new games. I found you when you had a focus on TMB content.
yeah I know you did Frodo, I will say the tub stuff really stalled especially post unbreakable with no new tmb on the horizon. I did struggle with becoming a "chip theory" channel and branching out. The truth is I play and love a lot more that just TMB so I pivoted. Not sure if that was the right move or not....
I'm here for the long haul, and I think others will be too. Majority of the games you cover are also games that I have a big interest in. There are probably bigger risks being a speciality channel than branching out.
if a game requires multiple play to enjoy then i dont have time for it
I think that is fair.
Are you revieweing this without using the Norwegians expansion? I feel the Norwegians expansion is a must with this game. Norwegians expansion completely reworks the action selection board and I believe is a must have for the game.
No I have Norwegians. Another good reason to dive deep into a game and understand in an expansion like Norwegians is a critical addition.
I like feast for oden. It’s a fair criticism that the game doesn’t need 61 actions. I’m fairly certain at high level play maybe half of those actions are getting used even once in a game.
Yeah I think depending on player count and blocking of key spots they are all if use at one time or the other but certainly not all of the time.
This, to me, felt like an even further refinement of Caverna, which was a refinement of Agricola. It certainly has the sandbox down pat. I can understand why this one would bounce for some folks, given the large number of choices coupled with only a tiny bit of direction. Certainly more plays of this makes it more apparent how to play better. This is one I recommend the owner solo play a few times, so that they can help teach the game and showcase how it works. The number of choices diminishes in your mind, once you realize how the actions work and start seeing the economies.
I think the system, as you refer to it, almost teaches gamers to play a game a few times and move on. I think if you did a larger deep dive for many of the KS games out there, even one you like, you may see that many of them aren't as fleshed out and complete as they seem, or they are far more shallow than originally experienced.
Agreed, thanks for watching and your thoughtful comments. Yeah the 61 actions can be reduced to 6 or so concepts but it was the perfect example of a game that deserves more time than what the typical board game review affords.
@npckse8508 This game is absolutely not a sandbox. It is not wide open to many possible viable paths to victory. Not at all. Your misuse of the word "sandbox" is probably the biggest reason this game pisses me off.
In general I agree with your point about the hotness. However after 10h of playing a game and you are at the point where you have not had fun with it and don't see how you might with more time spent on it I'm totally fine with saying nope it's not for me for reasons xyz. Because why not spend time playing games you already like. I'm happy to put work into a game but I need motivation and aFfO, for me did not.
I'd maybe recommend a hot take style of series and a deep dive series that you could work on in parallel. Hopefully giving us the best of both worlds. And also maybe follow up videos if you changed your mind on your first "takes". Imo there is a place for both.
I don't take a review for full if it's a prototype or the person is reviewing it after it just came out anyway :D
Thanks for the suggestions. I do agree that you know if it is for you after a few plays I will add though there are plenty of games that the luster wears off at the 10 play mark which would be helpful for a viewer to know before investing their own money.
@@Neon_Gorilla I'd counter though and would venture to guess that the average boardgamer doesn't play their games more than 10x times a year. At least if they don't play in under an hour. Most board games hold up to 10 plays over a year or two unless they really aren't that great
My rule is play the game until i would be comfortable enough teaching it to strangers without referencing the book. That's usually a good barometer that i know the game well enough. For some games that,s 1-2 plays, especially something that is a reskin/rework of another game. For some games, its a lot more. Or, a lot more time with the game at least. I reviewed Europa Universalis after 3 plays. But that combined for 22 hours of gameplay.
The key is there is not hard rule that works for any game. But i can tell you i can pick up the whole game of sushi go in a lot less time and lot less plays, than say Hansa Teutonica (Which im reviewing shortly)
@@3MBG I like this rule
What I find surprising is how you started liking the game well after having played it 5 times.
its pretty simple I started scoring well after learning some basic strategy. Acquiring the island and prioritizing income had a compound effect on what I could get done in a given game. A feast for odin in particular reminds you how bad you are because of the negative points associated with not filling your home board. So it is not very fun unless you are able to fill the board on top of scoring on other objectives. Once you figure out the strategy it becomes more fun.
I'd rather play Agricola or Fields of Arle. I'm tired of having to play a game 5+ times before start to enjoy them. If it doesn't really click for me after the third play, I'm generally ready to move on to the next thing.
I think with most games that is true for me. This certainly was a big exception.
I played this game after a long hiatus yesterday and remembered why we stopped playing. It’s not tight. It’s too long for point salad. There are too many actions but many aren’t viable. Swingy occupations. You get better after repeated plays but then it starts to feel on rails. There are just better, tighter games.
Yeah I think it might have aged a bit and designers have found better ways to facilitate action selection and variable powers.
I will say, if a game requires 3-4 plays to find the fun, thats a problem with the board game, not you.
Possibly. I think it depends on the game. Some games hold your hand and give you plenty of opportunity for bad decision mitigation. Others really make the player work for it from an understanding perspective. Lacerda’s games might be one of the best examples of this. Others get better the more you play and some lose the luster after the 5th play. I think in general you should know if you like it after a few plays but my point is that may not be enough to qualify you to “review” it. Thanks for watching!
@@Neon_Gorilla Yeah thats fair that a few plays isnt enough to review it (barring some exceptions) - and good point for games losing their appeal after a handful of plays, but I'd still feel better about my purchase if I bought a game and played it a handful of times then lost interest, vs bought a game and couldnt find the fun in it after 1-2 plays, as I wouldnt have any interest in trying again :P
It sounded like Feast for Odin failed on its rulebook/guidance for you to not do a part of the game and find from external sources thats what you need to do. (I havent played the game so I dont have any experience with it personally)
Sometimes one is looking for a harder game that takes longer to grok, but if the mechanisms don't quite fit, or the theme is not enjoyable, it may not hold interest long enough to get into the rest of it and it. For clarity, I am making this comment independent of A Feast for Odin, which I have not played.
@@Bob_Co I agree there is certainly a place and time for heavier games that reveal themselves over time. Most games I do get the ah ha moment fairly early if I am going to love it or not.
@@Neon_Gorilla I'm with @IJJusion on this. Grabbing someone's interest from play 1 is a key aspect of good game design IMO. As for Lacerda, while it may take a while to get good at them, they all grab me from play one. Yeah they're complex and take a while to learn, but there's so much good going on that even the first overwhelming and complex play session hooks me.
This game was sold to me by multiple reviewers as a sandbox. I feel betrayed, because this game absolutely does not fit my understanding of what a sandbox is.
Sandbox as a term applied to a worker placement game I think is fair. Sand box refers to open ended gameplay typically applied to an open world video game. In this instance the term refers to the countless actions you can take. I think it is a fair application but can see if taken literally how it could be misleading.
@@Neon_Gorilla I don't think that's fair. Total misrepresentation. To me a Sandbox game not only allows a player many possible options, but also strongly connoted is that many initial (up to a point) options are perfectly viable starting points, and then past such and such a juncture the game is about committing to the choices you already made. Is that fair? So, not necessarily a point salad (good or bad), and a point salad in my mind would also typically have a little bit more of a restricted action selection mechanism (like Bora Bora). So, if getting islands, and what's more- getting islands early isn't optional in doing well, then why is it presented as an option..? Reviewers shouldn't call this a sandbox or an open-world style game.
@@coltonbeatty6117 you win , it’s the wrong term to describe a shit load of actions of which you can select any of them and start to make progress on your goal of getting points…sure there is a happy path to victory but I would argue many open world sandboxes have that path as well and the guise of the open world is just that, the allusion that you can do anything you want which in many cases you can it just won’t have you win the game. Side note I highly recommend watching gameplays prior to buying any game. Semantics is tough and somebodies understanding of a word can alter how you perceive the review. When you say you were “sold” the game that implies nefarious intentions. Many of us make zero dollars and actually spend money to give you content for free. I don’t think anyone is trying to trick you into buying it they just have a different taste and might lack the terminology to describe their experience.
@@Neon_Gorilla Okay. I apologize if I've come across as a pedantic jerk. But here is my point. A game with a wide open decision space is not necessarily a sandbox. A game with a wide open decision space but/and many/mostly pitfalls is just that. Would you really describe Splotter games, like Food Chain Magnate for instance, as being sandboxes?
@@Neon_Gorilla Sandboxes are supposed to offer exploratory experiences. Not punish exploration. If islands/silver income and emigration completely over shadow everything else, then what's there to explore? (Haha, and yes I realize the irony of THAT word choice)
10:43 - I'm glad I watched until you said that. I almost unsubscribed!
ouch, because you thought I didn't like it? glad you kept watching :)