Mike is right about Knizia games being about what the players are doing. Some of his best games play out differently based on the players' decisions. The players at the table drive how the game feels. Sorry Tom. You're wrong on that one. :)
Came to say the same thing. Games like High Society and Zen Master (and many of his card games) are exactly this. Maybe it’s less true of his larger board games? I can speak less to that, but I’ve played quite a few of his card games and find Mike’s statement very accurate.
That was frustrating to watch, I'm not sure if Tom was just trying to playfully jab Mike or something but it was a great point that I would've liked to see them talk about more. Instead, he just got cut off.
I don’t think I’ve ever watched another Dice Tower review so filled with laughs about moments from gameplay. It doesn’t sound like my kind of game, but it was a ringing endorsement of the game, even if they never gave their official scores.
It sounds like Zoo Vadis is to negotiation games what Modern Art is to auction games. A very pure design, where every round is another negotiation (/ auction), but the game evolves from round to round. I understand why that can feel exhausting and why it isn't for everybody, but it sounds like a fun and intense experience to me. I hope this will get a German release.
Tom I think what Mike means is that the level of player interaction is high, and the amount of rule grit or non interactive elements you have to go through to achieve that player interaction is low.
I feel like if you’re going to give a game a 4/10, you need to be able to explain why. Joey just said he didn’t understand the game or cared what was going on. That’s totally fine, but you’re a review channel: you either need to give it a fair shake or decide what you’re going to say before the camera starts. I don’t have a horse in this race but I find it difficult to take a “reviewer” seriously when they don’t communicate.
Yeah I found that annoying too. One thing is criticizing a game for having convoluted rules. Other is not even trying to understand the rules and giving it a 4.
I mean, he did say he didnt like the Kingmaking aspect, he thought there was more talking than gameplay, and thematically he didn’t really understand his motivations. I think these are all valid points from his POV
So glad Joey was in the mix. Seems like a game I will love, but Joey's perspective tips me off on who might not have an enjoyable time with this. Mike on spot with his final comment
hmm the only negotiation game ive played so far is "Chinatown". I remember being very exhausted with the mechanic halfway through it. Also, I won because I made a good deal with another player and after that the player continued giving me great deals. Another player saw that I was ahead and completely stopped making any deals with me. So at the end of the game didnt feel great. I guess what I am trying to say is that I think these types of games tend to be very group dependent and I am hesitant about a game that is purely negotiation. I do like the theme of it and the fact that the play time is shorter, so will give it a chance if offered to play it, but I can completely see where Joey might be coming from.
Played this at Dice Tower West - such a great time! Playtime was only one hour with the teach at the maximum player count. The meeples were extra chonky too like the new edition of Ra.
@@kylesmorgabord5592 i think he did well, i got the sense that it's a bit esoteric, and hard to buy into if the theme doesn't sell you, he also said that it was kingmaker type, which makes already think that based on all this it's not a good fit for me or my group. but i understand your sentiment, i think based on everyone elses description of the game i can understand what joeys drawbacks were, but that might not be the case for everyone.
This game is fantastic. I love negotiation games (Chinatown, Bohnanza, I’m the Boss, Cosmic Encounter) and this one is easily one of my favorites. I can’t change anyone’s mind but I’m legitimately sad that people aren’t enjoying this. I need to play it more than the 4 times I have but it’s an almost perfect game to me as of now.
@@kylesmorgabord5592 sorry, was referring to other comments on this video. A few prople mentioned that they found the game flat or that they were agreeing with Joey.
I'm likely with Joey on this as well. Unbounded negotiation games are not my thing at all. They always fall apart - perhaps because I'm a terrible negotiator (or someone else at the table is). This one might work because different groups are in the negotiations each time? So I'd play it (with reluctance), but don't feel the need to get it.
The problem of kingmaking linked to negotiation games is because of players not understanding what they're doing or what they have to do to win. I think that is the reason why negotiation is not a popular genre, you have to think out of the box and interact a lot to win.
I played this with one of the publishers on this new version. We had some lively people as part of the teaching group...but even with all that...I found the game to be non existent. I am normally a Knizia disciple, but not for this! I'm surprised they liked it as much as they did because it wreaks of the "game" Diplomacy. RA is far superior in every way! Caveat emptor.
I’m confused how “I would actively avoid playing this game and would rather sit out than play” gets 4/10 and not 0/10. Like if that’s the scale than what would you possibly say about a game that’s a 3 or a 2 or a 1??? Why have a rating out of 10 when we could start at 4 and the highest is realistically an 8 or 9? Maybe we should shift the scale and make it 1-5 by cutting out the bottom 4 numbers and the top number. I think SU&SD talked about this in a podcast once.
We've used the whole scale on the channel. 1s are usually reserved for things that are fundamentally broken or basically an offense to gaming. Joey may hate Zoo Vadis and doesn't want to play it but it's not like he thinks it does a disservice to board games in general. For examples of 1s, check out reviews for Door Dash the Board Game or Experiments in Living.
The original "Quo Vadis" is one of the best negotiation games ever made, it has the perfect theme for it and the production was stellar. This one - - oh dear, what a mess.
I don't really understand Joey's reasoning for not liking it. Like, what was he trying to say about being confused by the peacock and the zookeeper? The rules for those are pretty clear... I also don't see how the game has kingmaking more than any other game. Kingmaking is where you provably cannot win, but you're choosing the winner. But here, there's always a spot available in the Star Exhibit for you, unless the game has ended, so you're never eliminated there. Also, if you do feel like you're choosing the winner, then surely you can just point this out to those two players, and let them bid on what you should do! Doesn't that prove this game has LESS kingmaking than most games?
@@uplift-yourdailypickup6424 I'm not entirely against anthropomorphic animals (although I'm usually not a fan) but the whole concept of animals using politics to become zoo exhibits is just silly. Especially considering that the original theme of a Roman senate was objectively more fitting for a negotiation game.
@@12345678abracadabra People don't shut up about how cute the anthropomorphic animals are in Root and Everdell. Most fantasy games have anthropomorphic animals in them. CMON prints about five billion anthropomorphic minis every month! Many culture's mythologies are littered with anthropomorphic animals and every one of them has been the theme for many, MANY board games. The biggest game at Gen Con was Lorcana, a game that wouldn't even exist if it weren't for anthropomorphic animals. In fact, most of Disney's IP output - Marvel, Star Wars, animation - involves anthropomorphic animals. Yet how many people gripe and moan when they release yet another game with a walking, talking animal? This argument is lazy. Move on.
@@KurtDepner same, seems like most gamers prefer their victory points and efficiency puzzles. I'm with the kind that prefers high interaction games and this one offers it, so i'm very keen
Glad Joey reviewed this, too, and I wish he got more chances to talk. I wonder if certain people would rate it as highly if they didn't know who the designer is ;) This game looks awful to me. Hard pass.
Tom claims you can’t teach it in 5 minutes after teaching it in 5 minutes.
Lol very true.
Mike is right about Knizia games being about what the players are doing. Some of his best games play out differently based on the players' decisions. The players at the table drive how the game feels.
Sorry Tom. You're wrong on that one. :)
Came to say the same thing. Games like High Society and Zen Master (and many of his card games) are exactly this. Maybe it’s less true of his larger board games? I can speak less to that, but I’ve played quite a few of his card games and find Mike’s statement very accurate.
Tom really should know better
That was frustrating to watch, I'm not sure if Tom was just trying to playfully jab Mike or something but it was a great point that I would've liked to see them talk about more. Instead, he just got cut off.
@@kylesmorgabord5592 Toms not one for deeper conversations
Oh it’s him? I usually like his game and I agree with what you have said
In German "Zoo" is pronounced more like "Tsoh", so it actually rhymes with Quo.
I don’t think I’ve ever watched another Dice Tower review so filled with laughs about moments from gameplay. It doesn’t sound like my kind of game, but it was a ringing endorsement of the game, even if they never gave their official scores.
It sounds like Zoo Vadis is to negotiation games what Modern Art is to auction games. A very pure design, where every round is another negotiation (/ auction), but the game evolves from round to round. I understand why that can feel exhausting and why it isn't for everybody, but it sounds like a fun and intense experience to me.
I hope this will get a German release.
As a person who recently fell in love with both Ra and High Society I am very interested in this one.
Chinatown vibes. I’m into it.
Mike's right, Tom's wrong! 😉
Played 2x at 4 player last night and it was amazing! So much fun!
Tom I think what Mike means is that the level of player interaction is high, and the amount of rule grit or non interactive elements you have to go through to achieve that player interaction is low.
I have the original Quo Vadis and it's great, the rules don't make it sound fun but it is.
Too often I find the criticism “it’s barely a game” translates to “I want more rules to get between me and the players.”
I feel like if you’re going to give a game a 4/10, you need to be able to explain why. Joey just said he didn’t understand the game or cared what was going on. That’s totally fine, but you’re a review channel: you either need to give it a fair shake or decide what you’re going to say before the camera starts. I don’t have a horse in this race but I find it difficult to take a “reviewer” seriously when they don’t communicate.
Yeah I found that annoying too. One thing is criticizing a game for having convoluted rules. Other is not even trying to understand the rules and giving it a 4.
Agreed. Got the same impression during his Amun Re review and haven’t really held my breath on his reviews since.
I mean, he did say he didnt like the Kingmaking aspect, he thought there was more talking than gameplay, and thematically he didn’t really understand his motivations. I think these are all valid points from his POV
Got a 7.8 bgg 800+ reviews he definitely in minority
He said it's king making the game. That alone is enough for me. I hate that stuff. That was more than plenty reason
So glad Joey was in the mix. Seems like a game I will love, but Joey's perspective tips me off on who might not have an enjoyable time with this.
Mike on spot with his final comment
I think I am Team Joey on this. I am really glad he was on this, because his view I think represents mine. Thanks Joey!
Yes, I predict you would not like it… at all.
An otter you can't refuse
hmm the only negotiation game ive played so far is "Chinatown". I remember being very exhausted with the mechanic halfway through it. Also, I won because I made a good deal with another player and after that the player continued giving me great deals. Another player saw that I was ahead and completely stopped making any deals with me. So at the end of the game didnt feel great.
I guess what I am trying to say is that I think these types of games tend to be very group dependent and I am hesitant about a game that is purely negotiation. I do like the theme of it and the fact that the play time is shorter, so will give it a chance if offered to play it, but I can completely see where Joey might be coming from.
Played this at Dice Tower West - such a great time! Playtime was only one hour with the teach at the maximum player count. The meeples were extra chonky too like the new edition of Ra.
Same! Not a big fan of negotiation games but this one worked for me, probably because it's so short.
Playing the part of Roy today is Joey!
What's worse? Zoo Vadis or Challengers! Joey and Roy debate.
Joeys foot twitch is on overdrive here 😂
The name makes more sense in german because how zoo is pronouced in german.
#TeamJoey
Really appreciate that Joey was part of this review. It does not sound like a game that fits my tastes at all.
We need more reviews from the DT crew who actually disliked the game!! The usual 7+ rating is getting boring…. #teamJoey
Agreed but it would've been nice if Joey had actually communicated what he disliked. He just said he didn't care or understand it.
He mentioned the kingmaking. @@kylesmorgabord5592
@@kylesmorgabord5592 i think he did well, i got the sense that it's a bit esoteric, and hard to buy into if the theme doesn't sell you, he also said that it was kingmaker type, which makes already think that based on all this it's not a good fit for me or my group.
but i understand your sentiment, i think based on everyone elses description of the game i can understand what joeys drawbacks were, but that might not be the case for everyone.
Is there a live play of this? Seems perfect for it!
Joey is leaving in the morning.
So what is worse?
Zoo Vadis instead of Quo Vadis…
Or Goodcritters instead of Goodfellas?
This game is fantastic. I love negotiation games (Chinatown, Bohnanza, I’m the Boss, Cosmic Encounter) and this one is easily one of my favorites. I can’t change anyone’s mind but I’m legitimately sad that people aren’t enjoying this. I need to play it more than the 4 times I have but it’s an almost perfect game to me as of now.
When you say “people” who else other than the guy that gave it a 4?
@@kylesmorgabord5592 sorry, was referring to other comments on this video. A few prople mentioned that they found the game flat or that they were agreeing with Joey.
I'm likely with Joey on this as well. Unbounded negotiation games are not my thing at all. They always fall apart - perhaps because I'm a terrible negotiator (or someone else at the table is). This one might work because different groups are in the negotiations each time? So I'd play it (with reluctance), but don't feel the need to get it.
The problem of kingmaking linked to negotiation games is because of players not understanding what they're doing or what they have to do to win. I think that is the reason why negotiation is not a popular genre, you have to think out of the box and interact a lot to win.
Is this the widest range of scores for a four person review so far? 4 and 9 is quite a gap!
I think Challengers was a wider gap - with Roy giving a "2" and Chris an "8" (oder 9?)
@@boardgamekrucke5212 Roy gave it a 2, Tom gave it a 8 (and Chris gave it a 7).
I wonder how great the experience of playing this compared to I'm The Boss (the boardgame one).
I thought this exact same thing! One of my regular group has copy of I'm the Boss and we do love that kind of mean free form negotiation game.
mathematically balanced rock
This game looks amazing! I've looked everywhere and can't find it to buy. That makes me a sad panda.
Joey, what are your thoughts on Chinatown? Actually.. what are everyones thoughts?
I’d also like to get Joey’s thoughts on Zoo Vadis. He didn’t actually say anything of note.
Just wait till they review the new edition: Waterfall Park.
My favorite Joey video so far.
Someone tell Joey they already made Kingmaker the game :)
Thanks for the review! Going to enjoy playing 🎉
Great discussion !
I heard "if a Knizia wok showed up at the door, Mike would be excited".
13:00 Just like Oath haha
I like how it's EXACTLY like another Reiner Knizia game because it's a remake
We need king making in more games
I played this with one of the publishers on this new version. We had some lively people as part of the teaching group...but even with all that...I found the game to be non existent. I am normally a Knizia disciple, but not for this! I'm surprised they liked it as much as they did because it wreaks of the "game" Diplomacy. RA is far superior in every way! Caveat emptor.
I’m confused how “I would actively avoid playing this game and would rather sit out than play” gets 4/10 and not 0/10. Like if that’s the scale than what would you possibly say about a game that’s a 3 or a 2 or a 1??? Why have a rating out of 10 when we could start at 4 and the highest is realistically an 8 or 9? Maybe we should shift the scale and make it 1-5 by cutting out the bottom 4 numbers and the top number.
I think SU&SD talked about this in a podcast once.
We've used the whole scale on the channel. 1s are usually reserved for things that are fundamentally broken or basically an offense to gaming. Joey may hate Zoo Vadis and doesn't want to play it but it's not like he thinks it does a disservice to board games in general. For examples of 1s, check out reviews for Door Dash the Board Game or Experiments in Living.
So sad that Joey didn't back up what he seemed to actually feel with an even lower score. 4 seems to high on this for him, I was expecting a 3 or a 2.
He’s too nice a guy.
Sounds neat, but I'm with joey. The king making the game. I can see that and I'll avoid this with a10 foot pole because of it
I'm with Joey on this one.
Agreed. I'm confident that I would hate playing this, but I would definitely watch people I know play it.
Using negotiation in games is crowd-sourcing of game mechanics
What do you mean?
The original "Quo Vadis" is one of the best negotiation games ever made, it has the perfect theme for it and the production was stellar.
This one - - oh dear, what a mess.
😂 hilarious review
I don't really understand Joey's reasoning for not liking it. Like, what was he trying to say about being confused by the peacock and the zookeeper? The rules for those are pretty clear...
I also don't see how the game has kingmaking more than any other game. Kingmaking is where you provably cannot win, but you're choosing the winner. But here, there's always a spot available in the Star Exhibit for you, unless the game has ended, so you're never eliminated there. Also, if you do feel like you're choosing the winner, then surely you can just point this out to those two players, and let them bid on what you should do! Doesn't that prove this game has LESS kingmaking than most games?
I just hate this theme so much ^^
Yeah I really dislike these anthropomorphic animal themes. Please stop
@@uplift-yourdailypickup6424 I'm not entirely against anthropomorphic animals (although I'm usually not a fan) but the whole concept of animals using politics to become zoo exhibits is just silly. Especially considering that the original theme of a Roman senate was objectively more fitting for a negotiation game.
Y'all need whimsy in life
@@12345678abracadabra People don't shut up about how cute the anthropomorphic animals are in Root and Everdell. Most fantasy games have anthropomorphic animals in them. CMON prints about five billion anthropomorphic minis every month! Many culture's mythologies are littered with anthropomorphic animals and every one of them has been the theme for many, MANY board games. The biggest game at Gen Con was Lorcana, a game that wouldn't even exist if it weren't for anthropomorphic animals. In fact, most of Disney's IP output - Marvel, Star Wars, animation - involves anthropomorphic animals. Yet how many people gripe and moan when they release yet another game with a walking, talking animal?
This argument is lazy. Move on.
King making is a huge problem for me. I couldn't play this with some of my friends for that reason
Toms pronunciation of zoo vadis infuriates me
I gotta say if I see the name Reiner Knizia in the box, I’m definitely avoid it. I’ve been burned one too many times
Joey was hilarious!
Justice for Joey!
This so-called "game" just feels half baked.
It’s fun with the right group but I know 80% of my usual gaming crowd would hate it.
@@KurtDepner same, seems like most gamers prefer their victory points and efficiency puzzles. I'm with the kind that prefers high interaction games and this one offers it, so i'm very keen
This game looks awful
I already agree with Joey
That's some lazy art on that board.
Glad Joey reviewed this, too, and I wish he got more chances to talk. I wonder if certain people would rate it as highly if they didn't know who the designer is ;) This game looks awful to me. Hard pass.
Joey gives it a 4. Tom gives it an 8.
Me: Oh. So it sucks then.