This vlog looks at different approaches to player interaction in boardgames - what forms can it take and why does it matter? Follow me on Twitter @boardgamewales
It's hard to find outside of the US. I was looking out for it for ages and found it in a bargain bin at UK Games Expo this year. If you can't find a copy, you could probably play it quite easily with any set of images. I would try using the cards from Codenames Pictures, or maybe even Dixit. There is something gloriously retro about grainy images of cassette-tapes and the other outdated paraphernalia in the Pluckin Pairs box though!
Yeah, all out attack, negotiation, social deduction, action and party - i love all categories starting with all out attack, and nearly refuse to play most games in earlier categories.
Adam, bonkers! Fantastic once again! Yes, the co-op game has never really interested me, maybe because of the alpha issue, but I do find this next generation of competitive co-op, or games where you need to cooperate a little but also look out for yourself of interest because it's a fine line to walk. Social deduction I'm a bit weak on too since I don't like to lie, although bluffing in some games like poker is of interest. Auctions are one of my favorites, but I haven't explored them much outside of the R.K. classics (Medici, Ra, M.A.) but I am looking forward to them in Five Tribes and Isle of Skye once I get them to the table with friends and/or family. Also, thanks for the last few gems at the end, Pluckin' Pairs sounds like great fun for my family, and Time's Up is also a clever mechanic. Lovely game room too! Thanks again.
I very much enjoy your videos - thanks for doing them. Obviously, I'm late to the party -- I just stumbled across your stuff on boardgamegeek a few days ago. Accidental blocking can easily transform into deliberate blocking. Takenoko is a case in point. Recently I started playing this game a lot with my SO. At first, both blocking and aiding were always accidental -- she might inadvertently complete a plot objective for me, or eat bamboo I was growing for a gardener objective -- but as we played more, we got better at reading the "tells" of what the other player was striving for. If I think she is growing red on a water-improvement plot for a gardener objective, I'm going to selectively eat that bamboo. If I lay a couple plot tokens, she's going to think of what plot patterns she knows of that I could be after, and she's going to lay a contradicting color. As it turns out -- if I block TOO much (like pointing roads into her cities in Carcassonne), my SO becomes so agitated with me that it's not worth it. Sometimes the social contract dictates your choices even more than the game does (if she ain't happy, ain't nobody happy :) ).
Robert Ahearne Yes, that’s been my experience too. Of course, there are probably many couples who thrive on competing with each other in games. In my relationships, it has never been worth it - the bad feeling after a particular game often makes a second game unlikely. I don’t think this is a male/female issue: I think it is an issue of hardcore-gamer (who wants to win) playing against casual-gamer (who usually just wants everyone to have fun!)
Oh, I've given a misleading impression: my SO and I thrive on competition -- she loves to beat me, and taunts me when she does. I love to win, but I also enjoy seeing her happy, so really I'm a winner either way. Things only get tense if one or the other of us win 4 or 5 games in a row... which rarely happens.
Oddly I like bluffing games the best although I am quite bad at them. But I like having to read the other players- anticipating what they might do. I love people watching so I can enjoy myself even though I know I am probably gonna loose 😂 But pair it with a nice theme. Like in Masquerade
I really don't like the terms "positive" and "negative" interactions here. You're using them interchangeably with constructive and destructive which are a lot more accurate. The former terms come off as pretty judgemental imo
I made the video 5 years ago, so had to dip back in to see what I said! And you’re right that I use the term “negative interaction” to mean both “bad experience” (which is its common usage) and “destructive gameplay” (which is how the term is used in gaming circles). So I certainly could have been clearer with my use of language! I think I’m pretty clear that I’m discussing my own personal taste here though, so hopefully no-one feels too judged! :) Thanks for the feedback.
I like the way you can explain a game in 1 minute when you give the examples
Thanks! Yeah, I'm trying to practice that skill! It's very useful when I'm pitching my own ideas to publishers!
Very interesting stuff as always. Thanks for taking the time to make these.
I need to get Pluckin Pairs. Thanks for another great VLOG.
It's hard to find outside of the US. I was looking out for it for ages and found it in a bargain bin at UK Games Expo this year. If you can't find a copy, you could probably play it quite easily with any set of images. I would try using the cards from Codenames Pictures, or maybe even Dixit. There is something gloriously retro about grainy images of cassette-tapes and the other outdated paraphernalia in the Pluckin Pairs box though!
I saw that copy at UKGE! And felt too lazy to carry another box around. I've just found it on Thirsty Meeples, so I guess I'm in luck!
Ah, great!
Yeah, all out attack, negotiation, social deduction, action and party - i love all categories starting with all out attack, and nearly refuse to play most games in earlier categories.
Hi Adam, than you for this excellent excellent excellent chaper! I hope you continue this with a top ten negotiation or positive interaction games.
Thanks! I hope to produce more videos soon. Game design is taking up a lot of my time at the moment!
Adam, bonkers! Fantastic once again! Yes, the co-op game has never really interested me, maybe because of the alpha issue, but I do find this next generation of competitive co-op, or games where you need to cooperate a little but also look out for yourself of interest because it's a fine line to walk. Social deduction I'm a bit weak on too since I don't like to lie, although bluffing in some games like poker is of interest. Auctions are one of my favorites, but I haven't explored them much outside of the R.K. classics (Medici, Ra, M.A.) but I am looking forward to them in Five Tribes and Isle of Skye once I get them to the table with friends and/or family. Also, thanks for the last few gems at the end, Pluckin' Pairs sounds like great fun for my family, and Time's Up is also a clever mechanic. Lovely game room too! Thanks again.
Very informative and helpful! Thank you.
All out attack is the best!
awesome video
Im at category 2 and oh boi i wait for the good ones to come xd
I very much enjoy your videos - thanks for doing them. Obviously, I'm late to the party -- I just stumbled across your stuff on boardgamegeek a few days ago.
Accidental blocking can easily transform into deliberate blocking. Takenoko is a case in point. Recently I started playing this game a lot with my SO. At first, both blocking and aiding were always accidental -- she might inadvertently complete a plot objective for me, or eat bamboo I was growing for a gardener objective -- but as we played more, we got better at reading the "tells" of what the other player was striving for. If I think she is growing red on a water-improvement plot for a gardener objective, I'm going to selectively eat that bamboo. If I lay a couple plot tokens, she's going to think of what plot patterns she knows of that I could be after, and she's going to lay a contradicting color.
As it turns out -- if I block TOO much (like pointing roads into her cities in Carcassonne), my SO becomes so agitated with me that it's not worth it. Sometimes the social contract dictates your choices even more than the game does (if she ain't happy, ain't nobody happy :) ).
Robert Ahearne Yes, that’s been my experience too. Of course, there are probably many couples who thrive on competing with each other in games. In my relationships, it has never been worth it - the bad feeling after a particular game often makes a second game unlikely. I don’t think this is a male/female issue: I think it is an issue of hardcore-gamer (who wants to win) playing against casual-gamer (who usually just wants everyone to have fun!)
Oh, I've given a misleading impression: my SO and I thrive on competition -- she loves to beat me, and taunts me when she does. I love to win, but I also enjoy seeing her happy, so really I'm a winner either way. Things only get tense if one or the other of us win 4 or 5 games in a row... which rarely happens.
please make a full video on Agricola
Oddly I like bluffing games the best although I am quite bad at them. But I like having to read the other players- anticipating what they might do. I love people watching so I can enjoy myself even though I know I am probably gonna loose 😂
But pair it with a nice theme. Like in Masquerade
🤩🤩😍
I'm so tired of multiplayer solitaire games
You are right they are the worst games ever. Even all the cooperative games are way better.
I really don't like the terms "positive" and "negative" interactions here. You're using them interchangeably with constructive and destructive which are a lot more accurate. The former terms come off as pretty judgemental imo
I made the video 5 years ago, so had to dip back in to see what I said! And you’re right that I use the term “negative interaction” to mean both “bad experience” (which is its common usage) and “destructive gameplay” (which is how the term is used in gaming circles). So I certainly could have been clearer with my use of language! I think I’m pretty clear that I’m discussing my own personal taste here though, so hopefully no-one feels too judged! :) Thanks for the feedback.