I really appreciate the fact that Rick mentions the number of plays and the sizes of the groups in his reviews. Rock on, gentle Thornquist, rock on!

I’m not an usual reviewer here (but I’m on Italians web sites) .. in the end of my reviews and comments I’m used to include a small note about how many times I have played the game ... I think is an information really important for players. That’s why, in my two “first impressions”, I have tried to focus more on mechanics than comments and I have made explicit the fact that the impressions was about games played once! I remember was in Mik’s BrettBoard the first time I seen this nice idea to include the number of times the game was played.

good play to all ... anyway I hope from Rick (and the others attending the gathering) a lot of “capusle” and “first impressions”!

Liga

Your point is a good one, Eric.  We should all make a point about how many players are in our games, particularly during the Gathering.  It can make a huge difference in how well a game plays.

Ironically, my first game of Tower of Babel (at the Gathering, natch) was with three and it was such a bland, unexciting affair that I wondered openly in my report if the game might be better with four or five.  The game still hasn’t clicked with me, so maybe it doesn’t matter with me how many players there are.

You’re absolutely right about Pickomino.  We did have a great seven-player game at the Gathering, but this was more because of the players than the game, which lasted a loooong time.  Four is probably the game’s sweet spot.  If someone took the effort, they probably could have figured that out by reading multiple reports, but obviously that doesn’t always happen.

And I have no problem playing a game with Stupid Player on the Right Syndrome.  Fortunately, I rarely play with stupid players.  I can only hope my opponents feel the same way!

Man, I give the guy a column on the site and the first thing he does is goes after me!

Just kidding, Eric! :)

Indeed, reviewers have to be careful when posting first impressions.  I try to give an objective description of the game followed by my subjective opinion.  That way, people can ignore my opinion if they wish and just concentrate on the objective description.  I also try to give the opinion of others that were playing the game, especially if they deviated from my own. 

I do go back and read my reports after some time has passed and I’ve had a chance to play the games a few more times.  I am pleased that even after doing reports on hundreds of games that I can only think of two where my opinion of a game really changed (they were two Knizia games - Lord of the Rings - The Confrontation as well as Einfach Genial).

As far as playing a game with a sub-optimal number of players - this is solely the fault of the publishers.  Schmidt says that Europa Tour works with four players.  It doesn’t.  If I wrote a report saying it didn’t work I think that is perfectly valid.

Of course, readers should be aware that reports from the conventions are just first impressions and should be taken as such. 

- Rick

Eric;

I didn’t mention the # of players in those games because I didn’t consider it an issue - all were with 3 players which is kind of in that ‘if the game doesn’t work okay here, it ain’t gonna work anywhere’ zone.

My thoughts on player numbers for the three games you mentioned?  Aquedukt I don’t think it matters - I think the game has issues regardless of player #.  Um Krone und Kragen I could see dragging a little with five, not to mention the player going last getting stuck with the leftovers once the other four have taken their first characters.  Diabolo I think would be okay with more, but the randomness would probably be highlighted and players would have to be okay with that going in.

pk

Patrick, thanks for the update on those games.

Rick, I brought up this issue for both readers and writers. As you say, readers should keep in mind that these reports are first impressions from people who might not be playing the games well—and might not even be playing with the right rules! I believe there was only one copy of the English rules for Tower of Babel, for example, and one player in my former game group refused to even try Fifth Avenue based on the Gathering reports from 2004.

Eric -

>… from people who might not be playing the games well—and might not even be playing with the right rules!

Oi, I’ve heard this canard too many times.  Of course it’s possible that someone might base a first impression on wrongly played rules.  The problem is that I can’t even think of an instance where an improperly played rule really affected a first impression of mine or anyone else that I have read. 

> one player in my former game group refused to even try Fifth Avenue based on the Gathering reports from 2004.

Well, it certainly is possible he is refusing to play a game he might like.  Then again, I think it’s much more likely that he’s saving himself from a game that just isn’t very good!

- Rick

Rick, I’m siding with Eric in this one.  My experience is LOTS of games that are recorded from the Gathering were played with incorrect rules.  Oftentimes, a second play corrects this, but the focus on the first reports is so great that the damage is often already done.

I think Fifth Avenue is a pretty good game, but that’s neither here nor there.  The fact is that this game really got slandered when it was released because players were doing really stupid things and then reporting the game was broken.  Of course, once this gets around, people start looking for the problem and it becomes kind of self-fulfilling.  But I honestly feel that if you sit down to play the game with no preconceptions that you’d never do the kinds of things that causes the game to break.  The early word from the Gathering, though, did seem to hurt the game’s reputation, at least at first.

Impressions of games from The Gathering I think can make or break a game.  With great power comes great...something.

Then again, while people might be too quick to shoot down a game, readers are too quick to take the impressions as gospel.  Impressions are, well, impressions.  Some writers are better about communicating their issues with games the first time they play them, and thankfully we have some good writers in our midst.

I am one of those to try out games that get dissed, because a) I am a rebel and I think many games go under the rader or are dismissed too quickly and b) only I know what game is good and what game is not.  As soon as others will admit to that fact, then we can all rest easier.  :)

While I have tried to keep it from clouding my judgement on a game overall, I have played several games with a slightly misinterpreted rule that significantely affected the game and made it less enjoyable.

(Return of the Heroes --> got bogged down by running out of tokens representing encounters due to a missing rule, World of Warcraft --> combat was slightly harder than necessary due to a mistake in attrition use, although this didn’t cloud judgement much, and I know one or two others that only vaguely come to mind so I can’t give them as examples.)