Tiger Spot (tiger_spot) wrote,
Tiger Spot
tiger_spot

  • Mood:

I answer some questions about games

"What's the most satisfying gaming-related experience that you've ever had?"

This one.

That was the most fantabulous suffusion of awesomeness I've ever been part of, and it's made me really picky about my gaming groups. The bits that will give you the best sense of the game are probably the quotes and the ThoughtRecord of the Power of Stories (Andres' character; he kept the most complete set of notes).

The absolutely most satisfying bit was the part where we won. You don't usually win roleplaying games.


"When you play games, is it important to you that you win?"

Um... well, I can't really say no after that, can I?

I would say that it is not so much important that I win as that I have the possibility of winning, if it is the sort of game that someone wins. I am quite happy to play games with no winners, like catch or Zendo (or roleplaying games), and I am quite happy to win or lose a game that is a fairly equal contest of skill, but I won't play two-player games with andres_s_p_b any more because he always wins. I prefer that my possibility-of-winning be preserved as long as possible, so games in which a player who falls behind at first will almost certainly lose tend to frustrate me. I don't like losing due to luck or another player choosing to damage me in a way that doesn't win them the game, but I'm fine with losing because I made an error or another player did something clever. I am much more cheerful about losing short games than long games.


And from a different questioner:

"You and andres_s_p_b have a lot of games. I like cooperative games. Do you have any you recommend?"

Hm. We don't really have much in the way of cooperative board games. I generally play Zendo somewhat cooperatively; it can be pushed as far in that direction as you'd like.

Scotland Yard and Fury of Dracula are both played as one player (the villain) against a cooperating team. They're effectively two-player games, where one side gets extra brains. They have very similar gameplay, except that Fury of Dracula adds a lot of complicating cards and so forth and takes a lot longer. Basically, the villain moves secretly around a board, and the other players try to find out where he is. I like playing the villains, but find the hero side less entertaining. Scotland Yard is short enough that the hero side can be a fun little puzzle, but Fury of Dracula drags too much for me to recommend it.

One of the many Lord of the Rings board games is cooperative. I believe the basic game is entirely cooperative, and the villain is played only by dice. (One of the expansions adds a player who controls the side of evil.) I have played it once, but I don't remember much about it. I think it's fairly popular for its type of game.
Tags: memes, objects
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

  • 6 comments