Which game is it and what did you not like about it?
Munchkin. I guess nowadays hating on Munchkin is no longer unpopular, but when I first played it the game had a rabid cult following. I understand that it might be fun to play with alcohol involved and with everyone just looking to have a good time and to laugh at silly things happening, but as a game where all the players are playing with the intention of winning the game isn’t enjoyable to me at all.
Munchkin is a great game, but it’s one you can’t play with board game or TTRPG people. You need either alcohol or people who aren’t used to/don’t worship strict board game rules and who aren’t afraid to muck about with stupid shit or pile on other players. The sort of person who’s favourite game is CAH or "uh…I dunno chess maybe?', not “here’s my six hour dissertation on why Jamestown: now with Wheat is the best”
Munchkin was my first modern card game (lets call it like that) and for this particular reason, I loved it. As a young adult (had the version without colors, just draws), I was such impressed, at that time, by how intense feels and interactions you could get by just playing a game. It truly creates a story around.
But depicts all the love I had for it, I realize the biggest selling point for me (active cooperation-but-go-in-hell!) was what tired gamers the most. Some wants to play game, and not discussing/fighting for everything happening on the table.
Now I’m definitely an adult and having play to many games, the intensity of a Munchkin game is just too much for me. Would love to play with young adult/teenagers because I know how fun they can get from it, but it’s definitely not a game for… (let’s say) Gamers.
Being a fan of engine/tableau builder, Wingspan really disappointed me. It’s not a bad game. It a very nice game, but the flow is average, at most.
Depicts some interesting ideas that push me to buy it with it’s first expansion (goal board, mix of engine and tableau building) it’s hugely luck based and the fact this game is rated 8+ on BGG, that tends to rate games mostly on advanced mechanisms and long run, is still a mystery to me.
I give it 5 plays with different peoples. Yet, I had no fun at all (I mean, zero… Watching flies around was the funniest part of my last game, sadly)… Then I played 51st State, which is a very good (yet not awesome) engine builder and have instant fun from start to end. The feeling of controlling things.
There are some highly rated games on BGG, and while I like some better than others, the ratings never seems off to me. Like “mmh, OK, I see why peoples like it”. But this offset has never been so huge with Wingspan.
So yes, I have it on my shelf, I watch its wonderful box like a disturbing mirror of my gaming tastes, knowing it’s praised by many, but I could almost try to find another table just when someone come up with the idea, while I usually really force myself to play games with different peoples because I know you will make peoples happy.
First time in my 20y of gaming, and it makes me feel so weird.
Thanks for reading me.
The only saving grace for Wingspan fore are the achievements in the digital version. I enjoyed having some bizarre setups needed to unlock the chievos and as a result I got better at the game I feel and was able to sort of get around the luck of the draw style.
What sent Wingspan into the stratosphere of popularity was more tapping into the non gamer middle age market with articles like the NYTimes.com at the time spreading the word.
Had it not pulled a Wii (a term I use when a company attracts a new demographic) I imagine Wingspan would have hovered around or above Viticulture popularity.
as a result I got better at the game
Reminds me Pokemon Stadium and Star Realms. The fast pace of digital versions improve your skills very quickly and gives new perspectives to the games. Maybe Wingspan is simply to slow paced for me.
Had it not pulled a Wii
A good expression for the situation. Wingspan’s success is definitly to a large part because of it’s accessibility. Every problem you have (no cards, food, eggs) has an immediate, guaranteed and obvious solution. Everything you CAN do improves your position. And if you play on the blue side there is barely any direct competition in the game. There’s no way to shoot yourself in the foot. There is no requirement to plan ahead.
But it does have some potential to plan ahead, optimize and compete for those who want to.
It also doesn’t fall into any of the typical setting tropes like fantasy or sci-fi that might put some people off. It’s production values are pretty enough to catch some eyes.
Wingspan is still worth checking out especially since it’s so easy to try on BGA. There is a reason it’s so popular, it works well for many people. Everdell is another very popular one with great production. Kinda falls into the same camp in that it often shows up on these “popular games that didn’t work for me” lists but it’s quite good for what it is.
On the smaller side Wild Space can be a good entry point. Small box, inexpensive, very easy to play, fun combos.
Or if you want to jump straight into the deep water and go for the best that’s Lorenzo Il Magnifico for me. Deus is another one I like a lot but that has a map component too.
For me this is Lost ruins of Arnak. The game is a sort of deckbuilder but it never feels like it. It also left us with the impression that you need to min/max from turn 1 and there is only a limited way to victory. Its on our list of games to resell. Do not understand the appeal
This is the same for me. Feel like a collection of half-baked attempts at mechanics from too many other games. The five turn limit is to short to do anything interesting with them, and makes it so the winner of the game is basically decided after turn 1. I like the theme and there are lots of games that are technically worse, but it just feels kinda mediocre and dull.
Catan and King of Tokyo. Catan was I think the first “modern” board game I was introduced to and it did not click at all. King of Tokyo wasn’t awful but given how popular it was at the time, I was expecting more. I’ve only played them once, to be fair, so it’s a bit hard to get into details but they’re the 2 that come to mind!
Catan just feels weird. The thing is - and I kinda validated that recently by watching highlevel competetive play of the catan base game, but: You only have like 2-4 meaningful decisions in a game. The rest is just follow through and dice.
And these things aren’t that hard to see at a decent level. And when you make these decent decisions, you mostly just win. Even with the robber, there’s limited counterplay to these good initial choices. This makes it hard to play casually as well once you know the good things.
I had great hopes for King of Tokyo but realize it’s one of those rated because of the production + reach the masses.
You should not expect more from KoT than a funny and visually appealing confrontation game. The more players you have the funnier it is.
Mage Knight. This game threw me in to an unbridaled rage with how much I loathed it. I couldn’t understand why it was rated so highly. So, I went to BGG to see just how so many people could like this awful game.
Turns out everyone plays it cooperatively. Not a soul plays nor recommends the competitive mode; the mode I was playing in.
Mage Knight was without a doubt the worst boardgaming experience I have ever had.
The blame is totally on the game owner who thought the “Full conquest” mode was appropriate for 4 players who had never tried the game. It was a miserable experience, lasted more than 8 hours long with up to 30 minutes between my turns.