Not every presentation of structured qualitative info about a game floats everyone's boat. Some people find these informative (as I do myself) and some don't. That's ok.
This is simply the words most frequently used in user ratings comments. If you posted a thread saying "what do people think of this game" or if you read all the user comments, these would be the things you'd most commonly take away. The headline list of ten words tells you the most significant features. The context tells you more.
So for those having trouble interpreting this in it's brief form above...1) Return of the Heroes revolves around
Quests. (The readers didn't necessarily know that until they started reading about the game, eg by reading the game description and/or reviews.) Context: They are
limited in number/variety, typically involve
going to a particular location, and hence involve
route planning.
2) RotH is often compared to three other fantasy themed adventure games. Context: Most often described as
"between" Talisman and Magic Realm with Runebound getting mentions.
Opinion is divided whether it's better or worse than any of the above, but usually described as
quicker.
3) The
rulebook is commentable. Context: It's
bad. It's written in a
conversational style, you
can't look things up, and it makes the rules seem more complex than they are. But at least some people feel those things
don't really matter for this game.
4) RotH is a
fantasy/adventure game. Context: But might be thought of as an
adventure game "for eurogamers". It has a
variable board setup.
5) RotH has
Characters (as per expectation for a fantasy/adventure game). Context: There are
M/F versions of each, they are
"unbalanced". You develop / build up your character during the game.
6)
Experience (for characters) Context: is gained through
"ferrying chits around" more than through fighting monsters.
7) As
"Items" is a game term, you would need the context other than confirming that they exist. You collect "items" in the game. Some are
"magic". They
encourage the characters to specialise / differentiate.
8) As
"Nameless" is a game term, you would need the context. There are
errors on the Nameless cards. And they may be
easy to beat.
9) As
"Tasks" is a game term, you would need the context other than confirming "Tasks" exist in the game. The "Tasks" are
similar to each other, you do
several at once and they compete for your attention, and the Tasks
system is good.
10) There is a
Bag in the game. Presumably a random-draw bag. Context: ... yes it's a
random draw bag. Things you want may be
stuck in the bag.
This Ten Word Review is less immediately qualitative than most. People discussing this game in their ratings comments commonly discuss specific features of the game but don't agree on any particular qualitative description. For many other games, the comments most frequently highlight that a game feels particularly long, or abstract, or fiddly, or chaotic, or brain burning, or fun, or a gateway game, or whatever, and many people will say overall it's a great/average/poor game. And all that information solidly comes though in the ten word list.
This one was the first time I considered explicitly skipping the game-specific terminology in order to dig far enough to get more generally descriptive words. Perhaps I should have.
Last edited on 2008-03-22 02:05:42 CST (Total Number of Edits: 3)
Posted Fri Mar 21, 2008 4:35 am
