by calandale
rzaleski wrote:
How is the criticism useful? If you don't like farming you won't like the game? Hardly.
Try reading the post. Out of two points raised, that's the one
I singled out as not useful.
I think the genres are far too different. There's at least 4 different types of games I've seen on this site, and they tend to have some overlap in both people and games, but they are different. Hardcore WarGamers/Combat Simulations are very different from Strategic Euros. So a War Gamer saying he doesn't like a Strategic Euro (I'm differing this from causal Euro like TTR or Settlers) helps no one since I don't think it'll hold for anyone else.
There are a lot of cross-over gamers. I'm one. I (and it seems the OP)
don't dislike all euros. There are some I really do like. I surmise
the same for him, from his statements. It is quite helpful to be
warned away from the ones which don't work well outside their genre.
Unlike say, Case Blue, which few non-wargamers would attempt based
upon obvious issues with size of rules and length, just what euros
carry well to those who can't abide by gamey rules which don't translate
to reality isn't clear without looking at more than the components. It's
good to hear from those who do.
Think of it like food, say we both like Burgers and Fries and here about an Indian Place down the street. The food is way too different for either of us to know we'll like it unless we try it before. And neither of us would really be qualified to say whether it's good or bad Indian food. All we can say for sure is we didn't like that restaurant, and start building reasons we don't like Indian food. If another friend says that Indian restaurant sucks, you should try this other one, it may be worth a try, but if again we don't like it I think we'd know we don't like Indian food. Doesn't mean everyone who likes Burger and Fries will hate Indian food though.
Right. But if you say you don't like it because it's too spicy, at least
I'll be warned that something I may be worried about will be the case.
So I really see no use to the review. I'm glad the author tried a Strategic Euro. I'm glad he's clear that he doesn't like it and why. Just not his boat then, fine, sorry he wasted his time and some money. I hope he'll MT it for something he likes.
I know what games I can't stand and I stay away from them, but writing negative reviews on them isn't going to change the fact that different people have different preferences and like them alot.
Reviews aren't for the people who already like the game. They are there
to give an idea of strengths and weaknesses. Again, this wasn't a
detailed review, but it served as some warning at almost no cost to
anyone. It also highlighted something which might be hard to find
skimming the loads of comments that such a popular game has - bringing
an important point at least to these eyes about a highly rated game
which I likely would (and probably still will) pick up on rating alone
(yeah - I'm stupid. But I want the experience).
I mean would it help for me to write negative reviews on all the Carc variants I've tried and dislike? Reallly?
Maybe. Especially if no one else bothered to point out the flaws you
perceive in them. It might be better to lump 'em all together though,
especially if the criticism can be generalized. It might also be better
for someone to make a list of lots of euros facing a certain flaw (such
as rules which don't match reality, or over too soon) - but that would
require investigating a lot of disappointments. I wouldn't wish that
on someone.