The Heist of the Century? - burncycle Review
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 5 ต.ค. 2024
- Support the Show: bit.ly/Support... / / shutupandsitdown
Buy This Game: chiptheorygame...
Visit SU&SD for more cardboard antics: www.shutupandsi...
~FOLLOW US AROUND, WHY DON'T YOU~
Podcast: anchor.fm/susd
Twitter: / shutupshow
Instagram: / shut.up.and.sit.down
Twitch: / shutupandsitdown
TikTok: / shutupshow
![[UNCUT]"ตุลามรณะ"ย้อนฟังคำทำนาย หมอดูทุกสาย ดวงเมืองร้อน (หมอปลาย ฟองสนาน อ.โอเล่)I คนดังนั่งเคลียร์](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/lE5az5VvT9M/mqdefault.jpg)
I haven't laughed so hard in a long time hearing "Mathew Lees and his big bowl of soup are miles away from your table". Thank you so much for this
Agreed! Still giggling!
I read this comment before watching the video and the line STILL made me guffaw
Lol YES!
They measure in miles? Fake British.
@@Pogg1028 The line was known but the context was unguessable
“Ominous Matt” when he’s hovering his hand over the applause button is my favorite Matt since sandworm Matt. That facial expression and body language killed me.
Same
Plastic peg coming out of a tiny hole on a neoprene mat has got to be the worst made-up tactile sensation I have ever imagined to myself.
What about short fingernails against pool table felt?
Or sleeved cards that are completely sticked together that needs shuffling.
🤮
The struggle to pick up a card from a wood table that's completely surrounded by other components.
Worth a note that Burncycle doesn't really want you to choose randomly. You should be random, maybe, for your first few games, to see the various bots and corps and captains, but it fully intends for you to choose a random corp and captain, then carefully select your bots to meet that challenge.
This. It'd be like explaining Spirit Island as a game where you randomly choose spirits and adversaries. No. Don't do that. Dear god, no.
I think they should have mentioned this. The rule book says to do this. This is a big part of the game. Coming up with a general strategy at the beginning of the game to fit the mission and boss is (in my mind) the meat of the game.
I’m really surprised chip theory games doesn’t make smaller games, as I could see a company like this doing really well if you could take it to the pub and pull it out of your pocket. There’s probably lots of fun small games you could make out of a few cards and some poker chips.
But would they lure as much bucks as KS blings?
Yea they could team up with the people who make the tiny epic series.
They did Trip Lock a few years back. Small box. Puzzly and thinky. Good solo as well as 2p. Affordable... Worth looking up.
@@jasoncross4165 Also, as far as I can tell, hasn't sold as well. Which is unfortunate.
This game feels like it really needs a fan-generated list of "here are the combinations of scenarios which work best." Perhaps with some difficulty rating attached to each, but still giving a relatively narrow list of recommended combinations.
Probably a campaign mode with pre-designed scenarios and narrative will work?
But then, is it the fans' job to play a design role to fundamentally fix a broken game that most will have spent the best part of £200 on?
Isn't it the designers' job to make their very expensive game reliably enjoyable?
@@christopherleffler4096 This is exactly what I thought. Early on in the video - “hmm, this is is a bit like Gloomhaven if it had no scenarios. I write scenarios, I could fix this”
30 seconds later: “why would I spend £120 on a game I might be able to fix when I can get a great game for less?”
@Randall But then we get to the ending where we start questioning if the game is even good when it is going well.
@@nicksims2827 There are also games that balance random generation and coherent narrative.
We've been playing Bardsung, where the way a dungeon maps out is random, but is based on cards drawn from a preloaded deck. The result is an experience that is variable and organic, but in which you still get a real sense of playing out a story with meaningful choices and a tangible objectives.
From this review, it just seems that Chip Theory didn't fully test the implications of their design choices. And it's a shame, but equally, if you're going to charge this much money and make this much plastic, you should be doing better.
My partner tested positive for covid yesterday so I slept on my living room couch trying to isolate myself. In my loneliness I binged a ton of SU&SD videos. Thanks so much to the team for providing fantastic media to keep us sane in tumultuous times :)
We wish them a speedy recovery! Glad we could provide some distraction :)
I hope everything works out. Say Hi to the doc for us.
To be clear, you ARE able to choose your mission and then choose your bots, mentioned at the top of their respective sections in the Learn to Play. You can absolutely choose your bots to try and best suit the mission, or you can always stay true to the ones that speak to you or look fun.
"Select any mission card you would like to play, or choose one at random."
"All players may go through the bot cards (looking at their agent side) and freely choose which agent they would like to play. Players may choose their agents in any order and may confer with each other to create a team that will work well together for the chosen mission."
Yeah this is a *very* confusing miss on SUSD's part as it's like...not even remotely ambiguous in the rules.
Yes, but there are no real guide to what would make a good game though. Games like Imperial Assault have a campaign guide for a reason. If you are experienced you might be able to craft a good scenario yourself in Burncycle by picking the correct missions+agent+bots and so on, but not as a new player. Not to mention, beating a mission that you tailored for yourself is not really the same as playing a scenario designed for you to struggle with, or even a random setup. It just feels cheap.
@@Sammathnar I mean...I guess? Some games lean into intensely designed one-off scenarios, others aim for "infinite" replayability with a lot of random elements. Nemesis comes to mind in this regard. There are games of Nemesis that come together with beautiful tension to absolute perfection, and others that someone dies halfway through and it feels clunky. Some people love Gloomhaven's approach and others hate that once it's been played through it's done. Just a matter of taste in my opinion. I don't think either approach is bad - and the former is certainly not "cheap" - even if it doesn't always come together.
@@Sammathnar In this case that doesn't seem like a flaw to me. If you don't know what's good, you can pick random and if you lose you at least know how those bots play and hopefully when is useful to have them on the team. My first mission I thought I was going to pick randomly but decided I wanted to tailor my team for what the scenario presented (based on my limited knowledge from the tutorial and bot descriptions). And, I won that scenario.
@@Sammathnar I've completely randomized all my games of burncycle (except the first), and I haven't run into any unfairly punishing combinations. I certainly haven't ran into anything as mean as Imperial Assault can get based on what upgrades the overlord chooses.
Additionally, I don't think you have a very good understanding of how the scenarios are constructed. The best comparison would be the app-assisted missions for Imperial Assault. During the first mission, the game will spawn in some enemies worth around 4 points. During the second mission, it'll spawn in 6 point enemies. That's essentially the same method burncycle uses to generate guards. As you progress through the levels of the corporation, the enemies get slightly more dangerous. On the final level, you'll typically see the captain come out which isn't too different from an AT-ST or Darth Vader showing up in Imperial Assault.
You joke, but in the when the ice caps melt and the ocean floods and we're all clinging to existence in the rusting, floating hulk of an oil tanker and it comes time to decide our new war chieftain to lead us in battle with the dolphin mutants, you'll be grateful we have mediocre waterproof boardgames to settle such conflicts instead of bloodshed. Which ironically would also be able to be washed off the board pieces.
Glad that DVD finally got released.
I'm a bit of a neat-freak when it comes to board games, but in honour of Matt I'm going to play my next Quacks game with a big bowl of soup in the centre. Maybe I'll have a blind bag of croutons to occasionally throw in.
I think you should put sweets into the actual quacks bags as well.
It'll all be great up until that last cherry bomb.
Sprinkle some cheese. Not in the soup. Mwa-ha ha.
I split a beer on my copy of Quacks, it's actually terrible because some of the chips have swollen to the point that they feel different when you go to grab them from the bag.
@@DeanMachine3333
Oh no!
The end 30 seconds was one of the best things I have ever seen and legitimately made me laugh out loud and then continue to chuckle to myself...
I must say I was luke warm on Brewster when he first splashed into SUSD but I have to say I look forward to his reviews and presence in your content. He seriously embodies the core beginnings of SUSD and nails every joke. I'm flabbergasted at how great SUSD has gotten with all the new additions of staff. SUSD has a a great eye for for what makes its content great and am certainly happy to have found them. Cheers!
Quick note on mechanics. With the exception of the top floor Captain, security units inside rooms do not move unless triggered to do so, e.g. becoming aware of a bot inside the room with them, or being closest to an awareness chip outside of the room. Given the complexity of their movement, this change alone will save you a lot of time and headache.
So, regarding plastics -- board games, imo, are one of the best candidates for using plastic materials. It's an expensive purchase that you're going to be using dozens or maybe even hundreds of times, it gets handled a lot, used around foodstuffs and drinks...Accidents do happen. Sometimes it's a little wipe off as Matt mentioned, but other times cards and boards can be ruined. (I've had components ruined by drink spills before).
I understand wanting to be environmentally conscious -- it's admirable and should be encouraged...but this isn't a single use plastic. It's not a water bottle that you're going to drink out of once and throw it away. It's something that is going to be in your collection for years, maybe even generations. I would want to protect that kind of investment, make sure it's resilient. I'd feel a *lot* better about buying an all plastic board game second hand than I would be buying a cardboard game second hand.
I loved the review and I appreciate that SUSD isn't timid on criticizing unfriendly environmental practices...but this particular criticism seems unfairly placed and not well thought out. Plastics aren't evil -- the ways we use them should be smart. I think board games are a smart way to use them.
Sustainability is super low on my list of criteria when deciding to buy games, probably like most people. I don't know why the SU&SD guys make such a big deal out of it always. It detracts from the rest of the video.
You give that man a drink on the job and press the applause button this instant!
At 13:50, when Tom says Burgle Bros. Is less replayable than Burncycle, I wholeheartedly disagree. There’s a misconception with current games, ESPECIALLY with the kickstarter crowd, that variability = replayability. This is the lie that current games sell you to sell you more content. Good gameplay will always be played more often than variability. I’ve played Pax Pamir, Carcassone, Galaxy Trucker, Food Chain Magnate, Burgle Bros. etc. all well over 30 times each, which have little to no variability and loved every second of those games, but I’ve played my all in pledge of Final Girl 3 times (I really forced myself to play it that 3rd time). More content does not make a game better. I’ve found, if a game relies on variability as a hook, it’s going to be a bad game.
Ideally you have both. Good gameplay without variability to me is like a car without wheels. It might be a really nice car but it ain't going nowhere.
Thank you for pointing this out! Stuffing more mediocre content on a good game doesn’t make it great. Just makes it more expensive. It is a real issue
I feel much the same. I've played tonnes of Carcassonne, star realms, potion explosion, and others, and keep coming back to them because they're simply fun to play. Then I ran into the trap of buying one or two too many Carcassonne expansions, which made it too big, too cumbersome, and less accessible.
Thanks for pointing this out. There are plenty of games that have very little or very subtle variability, but I still come back to them over and over. Sometimes to get better and really dig into a system , sometimes for other reasons. Most recent example: Lost Ruins of Arnak. A game I dismissed at first, yet I am finding a lot of satisfaction in its subtle variations. Or Innovation.
My most played game in my collection is Love Letter because fun and accessibility are way more valuable than board game geek lets on.
On 14 July 2021, there was a flash flood here in Ahrweiler, Germany, due to unusual high rainfall. A normally rather small river rose up by more than 7m overnight. Some houses got flooded up to the 2nd floor, some got washed away completely. More than 130 people died in a single night.
One man recovered his Too many Bones collection from his flooded game room.
I gave him my cardboard boxes of the games, as that were the only component not water proof.
I think that game will always be special to him as it was the only game that survived the flood.
And yet, I am pretty sure he would give everything to live in a world with less disasters.
Part of the game, for me, is the setup. Pick your mission and captain randomly, sure, but then strategically choose your bots to best solve that mission's puzzle. So I dunno that I've run into the "random generator issue" that you speak of.
I do agree that this is a 1-2 player game. No more.
I quite enjoy it, but would recommend TMB or Cloudspire over it , probably.
I enjoy it as a 2-player game. I'd never play it with more. And, we haven't hit the "random generator issue" either.
My main issue with the game is that they could've streamlined the game a bit by nixing the network board. It's baked into the game, so there's no removing it at this point. But, it seems like something that should've been cut early on during the design phase.
We're yet another step closer to the Board Gamers: Endgame crossover we all want.
But one has to wonder if Rodney Smith will be the Iron Man... or, perhaps, the Thanos?
@@vee-bee-a Tom Vassel is Thanos.
I'm not interested in this game but their writing is great so I'm not complaining.
From now on, if I don't draw the right cards in a board game, I'm gonna start threatening the game with Matt's bowl of soup like a parent reading a horror fairy tale to misbehaving children before bed.
Do you also put dice that roll badly in the microwave and make the other dice watch?
@@frankharr9466 No, I put them in the fridge overnight.
@@lostfan10000
Good. That's much more merciful. It's not their fault, really. They just crate random numbers.
This game seems ripe for player-made scenarios, I'm sure a collection will be built on BGG
Waiting in rooms waiting for guards to go by…
How many hours of Metal Gear did I spend doing that?!
I dunno about the criticism of production with Chip Theory. Seems like there should be room in the hobby for luxury-style games, provided the pricing matches that and people know that’s the experience they’re paying for. Yeah, it could be done in cardboard, but is the goal of sustainability just to make components the most biodegradable they can be? If that’s the case, we might as well all only do print and plays.
I understand that SUSD's platform is board games, so it makes sense to call out anything they find environmentally irresponsible in the board game space. But complaining about this sort of thing in the board game space is a bit like complaining about black licorice as it relates to the childhood obesity epidemic. Like, sure...candy, sugar, etc is a problem. Black licorice is a candy. It's also a candy that's enjoyed by like...a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of the population, and definitely not by most kids. It's fair to criticize, but a racist uncle comparison ain't it with an industry with as small of an enviromental footprint as board games have.
Wow, how did you get Lyle Lovett to appear in the video?
That ending wins the internet for today! Congratulations
Gottta love a Kurt Vonnegut Reference on a T-Shirt. Well done, sir. Well done.
That outro.... Gold.
One four-player game of this was more than enough for me. It took a painfully long time, and the downtime between turns was INSANE. On top of that, it just never ended up being very interesting. Even the ending was super anticlimactic. The final floor ended up being an absolute joke because of a lucky Network card draw. Hard pass for me.
One thing that should be clear is, the base game only comes with 3 corporations and a few bots. The expansions he mentions right after are what adds the 4th corporation and a lot of the more interesting bots. Just want to clear that up for people interested in buying.
This game reminded me of Invisible Inc, a video game Matt & Quinns played on Cool Ghosts ages ago.
That's how the game plays too. It's very much a board game version of Invisible Inc.
@@VaultBoy13 I have to disagree. That's an insult to Invisble Inc., which is a fantastic, clever, and snappy game. Burncycle is an unending slog of over designed bloat. That's my opinion at least :D
I don't entirely understand the critique of the plastic use in their games. It's not like its single-use plastic or something. The games basically last forever regardless of plays, so you'll never have to replace them like you would a traditional BG. That also means they're less scuffed second-hand.
It makes the usability nosedive and the cost soar.
I'd actually really appreciate a game with at least waterproof cards. I've got hyperhidrosis - ridiculously sweaty hands - and cards that I don't have to worry about wrecking would be really nice.
For games where you have a hand of cards, at any rate.
Let me introduce you to Radlands!
@@alwaysardent1125 Yes, but specifically Radlands deluxe. Radlands is really fun.
Plastic cards do exist, but are rare in games. Palm Island is one I can think of.
Sleeve your cards, maybe? Extra faff and expense, but might remove the stress
@@JorWat25 yeah, was going to mention Palm Island too, it's a great game as well! :)
Great review. Big CTG fan here and lover of Too Many Bones/Cloudspire, and I'll say that having kids and loving the tactile qualities makes me a big lover of the neoprene and chips combination (enemies look so good on an imposing stack of health chips.) These are games I'll hold on to for a good long time, and the longevity of the production quality is appealing to me. (As opposed to the first version of Terraforming Mars where the gameplay was excellent but the pieces were fiddly and would blow around at the slightest movement of players.) It's great you raise these questions and are tough on companies when it comes to over, or under, production.
I have a similar experience with War Chest and its chunky tokens. They feel good to use, display what's going on, and are durable. Sure they could be cardboard tokens, but they'd break down sooner and get creased/marked easily. Plastic tokens are pretty good for the longevity of the peices if nothing else.
@@sagatario58 War Chest chips are bad to shuffle. Lighter chips would shuffle better.
That final DVD was actually really relaxing. Credit!
I was really on the fence when this game kickstarted. It checked all the right boxes for me--cyberpunk? heist game? sign me up!--but thankfully I had the presence of mind to watch some of the videos the creators put out describing how to play the game. It seemed like an incomprehensible mess. I noped out hard after that.
So I dont get some things
1. Why have you not chosen your own setups instead if randon after sone time? I would guess with some understanding of the system you can choose things which work for you?
2. Have you really never seen water/cola spilled over cards? Or played a game near a pool and the cards got bad just from the wet air? Not that I want my games necessarily waterproof, but i can see some reason behind it.
3. I still find it strange that you make a video about a board game event you organize on anozher continent and fly there, and then have a video complaining about too much plastic...
"Bashing through a wall into a room full of guards, like a robotic Kool-Aid Man"
*_SMASH_* "Oh NO!"
"My Copy of Cosmic Encounter is Absolutely Shagged" Careful, this is a family show!
I had my eye on burncycle for a while, and I always assumed it had a structured campaign. I'm glad I avoided this.
"Burncycle... It's fine!"
~ Tom Brewster, 2023
why is the phrase 'matthew lees' so funny
How is Too Many Bones so broken?
I love your videos, seeing matt raise up with that machine whirring noise was unbelievably entertaining.
TOM I LOVE YOUR SHIRT SO MUCH IM USING ALL CAPS AND NO PUNCTUATION
Hahahaha this had so many good laughs in it. Thanks for the informative and entertaining review, Tom and Matthew!
Not related to the review, bu I got a screenshot of the intro before ‘& sit down’ appeared. Now I have a pear doing a thumbs up with the words ‘shut up’ next to it and it’s hilarious
That ending was perfect ☮️
Never commented on a review before. This was wonderful. Just a delight. I disagreed with almost everything. It was amazing. 10/10
Same
You draw a random captain, and that's it. According to the rules you choose the command module, each players bot, and the mission you want to play (which is attached to the corporation). I have problems with this game, but randomness is not one of them.
They also said there are four corporations when there are only three without the expansion.
Inconsistencies aside, I own this game and find it like a solid 6 out of 10. Mostly because after you get the hang of it, it’s kinda on the too easy side. And they basically allude to that here. When you play the game well, you’re avoiding most of the crunchy risk-reward systems in the game.
The network is a great example. There are like three optimal lines through it, and you can solve for that and rule the network phase every time.
This video was worth it alone for that outro. Top tier stuff.
This is the first time I have to give a clear negative review to one of your videos.
Many people, and other content creators, love this game. And your review is lacking your usual nuance in helping people figure out if this is a game for THEM or not. This is, quite literally, a heavy game. But far from as random as you make it sound.
It is the perfect game for people who like to scheme. You can feel clever in a variety of ways - from your team composition, adapting to situations, planning for bad outcomes, and, occasionally, steamrolling a mission because you managed to snowball a series of great decisions.
If, like video made it seem, you just want to „do stuff“ without planning ahead as a team, then, yes, you will get crushed - and deservedly so.
But then at least make the effort, as in your other videos, that what you criticize here is actually something other gamers might love.
Hilarious ending! For part 2 of Roll-Axed can I request a So Very Wrong About Games gregorian chanting of Cosmic Frog's rules?
I’ve never really thought they push the waterproof gimmick all that much. Not that they NEVER bring it up but I think the real gimmick to CTG is that they typically don’t use models but chips got almost everything. And I’ve been in several CTG game groups on Facebook for 2-3 years at least.
That ending. Hilarious. Don't be afraid to put honest reviews out there!
Covered my keyboard with water as I LOL ať the keypad sound fx. Great review. Glad I didn't back it. I am these days moving away from kickstarter packed monstrosities and look for quick and fun simple ish games due to time constraints.
I don't think being waterproof is one of Chip Theory's major selling points. I'm pretty sure it's just that the components look and feel nice. Yes, this inflates the price of the game, but I think there's a reason that neoprene mats are stretch goals for every Kickstarter game I've ever seen.
It seems like too much of a good thing to me, though. I would just have the feeling of "Why do I have so many mouse pads on the table?" I also agree with them that having poker chips but only using them as basically board game chits just seems like it'd feel like a wasted experience.
As a comparison, I have the wooden deluxe tokens for Bullet
@@kyleb8117 I understand that, there's nothing wrong with wanting more out of the game or even criticizing it for not taking advantage of its components, but when I sit down to play a game of Destinies I'm not thinking, "they didn't need to include plastic miniatures for this game, they could have been made of cardboard," even though it's true.
The miniatures add nothing to the game, most of them are too small to make out the details at a glance, and they don't even put in enough for every point of interest (which is what they represent).
It's just an odd criticism to me because having worse components doesn't make the game better either.
@@SparklyNoises It's tough because sometimes I get deluxified stuff and I'm excited (e.g. My Father's Work's corked glass bottles that are absolutely excessive but somehow really satisfying) and sometimes I'm just mad that it could've been the same quality game and just as enjoyable for less money if they didn't have minis. Yet I play games like Last Night On Earth and have no issue with the unnecessary minis.
I think it's just the fun factor for me. Chips on a neoprene seems stupid to me unless you're stacking the chips or slamming them like Pogs. If I was going to back a Kickstarter and saw useless minis and a bloated price with little gameplay (e.g. the one for MHW), I hate it. Otherwise, I guess it's no big deal. CTG just feels like bloated Kickstarters to me. Paying more to get nothing extra of value, just excessive fluff.
I think the argument for worse components is just that they're not overvaluing themselves or extorting you for no added experience. They're giving you a good game with basic components and that's fine (so long as the components aren't janky and going to just fall apart or something).
@@SparklyNoises I think that figures are just more obviously nice and suitable. That's not to say you can't appreciate the poker chit style, but there's also a reason that most games opt for figures/props instead of cardboard tokens on a grid board to represent players.
Ultimately I think it was a really merit-worthy experiment that has probably gone too far. I must caveat this by also saying that I haven't looked at the KS for their games, and if they're at all offering cheaper versions without the chits then I don't believe this criticism is any longer warranted.
I do think that, personally (but I love Chip Theory components). Especially for Destinies. And in fact, I mostly used the POI tokens. (There is a reason they're there, though - the minis are POIs that move around, the others stay in the same spot.)
But I find minis actively detract from the experience and can make it more difficult to play, whereas chips, neoprene, plastic cards, et al make it very much nicer even if they're unnecessary.
I like chip theory games production value and I like shut up and sit down. Yey
I really enjoy burncycle. Maybe it's because my group plays mostly complex, long, thinky games that take 3-6 hours and I rarely win, so putting four hours into burncycle and getting our asses kicked isn't a particularly novel experience for me. Like TMB, burncycle has a steep learning curve and the ass-kickery has plateaued along with our understanding of the mechanics. Downtime between turns is non-existent since we are constantly helping each other make choices, both for the current player and setting up the burncycle for the next.
Harsh review for sure. Maybe I'm in the minority here but I love the neoprene and the chips and the plastic cards. I'm a sleever though so maybe thats why.
Interesting take on the game. Not sure that I agree but that's ok. We all have different opinions and if we all liked the same games it wouldn't be a very diverse world in boardgames.
I think I might know why games are using neoprene mats instead of cardboard boards. According to Cole Wherle, a neoprene mat looks better in pictures and therefore social media posts of the game are more likely to generate sales.
The gameplay might be subpar, but the board does look good through the whole video in a way that cardboard can't replicate.
I assume you've never actually played a card game or any game where moving components around is regularly happening on neoprene. Though you can't print in as high of a resolution on neoprene, so to that degree it looks "worse" - everything else about it short of storage is a vast improvement. You can grab cards and components way easier, it doesn't bump around the table, it's spill proof, etc. Doesn't mean the cost is necessarily justified, but the gameplay is not suppar, at all. It's objectively better in most cases.
The thing about boardgames is you typically keep them for as long as they last. Is cardboard actually better environmentally for this use case? In my brief reading, it seems like cardboard actually has a bigger impact on the environment to produce - all the benefits vs plastic are after the life of the product. If a game is good enough that every copy is going to be moved from person to person and not thrown out until it is no longer usable, plastic almost certainly wins out environmentally.
@@prototypep4 Fair point about legacy in general, but I don't think Gloomhaven is the best example. They included a random dungeon generator mode that is genuinely fun, and they released all the files necessary for the community to make their own content. Even just playing through all the content in the game is more hours of gameplay than most non legacy boardgames are ever likely to match for most people. In terms of environmental impact per hour of play, for my personal collection I suspect the only game that beats Gloomhaven is Love Letter (yes, I may have played too much Gloomhaven 🤣)
@@prototypep4Surely no one is just tossing out Gloomhaven 🤣 I imagine it either gets sold, given away or sits on a shelf getting dusty. In any case, it's just sequestered carbon. Much the same as any other boardgame. Basically I think we agree - boardgames are just not a good target for environmental criticism
Truly enjoyable review, especially the relaxation part at the end 😄
I need that relaxation DVD
I'm not going to buy, had zero interest in playing or learning the rules... and yet naturally I watched the entire video and loved it! Hilarious, informative and overall a joy.
Hmmm… did you really played the game or did you just watched some early tutorials and mixed up your notes?
Some basic game elements are displayed and explained wrong.
Except the review part, it was funny to watch.
Can you release a full-length version of "Getting Roll-axed"? I think it's the best session of therapy I've had in years.
I really thought Matt was going to give Tom back his booze at the end, but the DVD is probably a healthier way to cope with internet backlash.
Have the game and think it’s great. You don’t choose random bots unless you want to make thing more difficult. The network side of the game is there to do the mitigation that you found lacking. I have played 10 games now using multiple bots and never found myself in an untenable situation so I wonder if you spent enough time learning the game.
I love and really appreciate honesty in a review.
Honesty?
They mixed up some key game elements… 😂😂😂
The video is funny, the review kind of bad (too many critical mistakes).
"Drink the devils Advocaat" truly incredible
Backed the game, love the game. I understand SUSD's niggles and criticisms and they're mostly fair, but feels like their general distaste for CTG's production level (which I absolutely **adore** for whatever that's worth) gave this one a little extra...axe grinding? The repeated criticism of not being able to choose your bot is just a straight up error on their part. It's in the rules that you can choose your bot for the mission and it's not remotely ambiguous. An unfortunate and obvious mistake from my favorite channel that kind of undermines much of the review in my mind. Oh well. Still love you, Matt and Tom. And Quinns. I guess.
Sounds like it looked at "Oath" and said, "What if I took everything that make Oath stupid but absolutely work, and just threw it away so it isn't worth the time instead?"
I have to say, I really don't see the problem with making the game out of plastic; pretty sure the production is actually less taxing on the environment, than paper. The problem with plastic is when it is used for products with very short life-cycles and isn't properly disposed off, but board games do not have short life-cycles, so these issues doesn't really apply in the same way.
Otherwise great video! =D
Great review, and I loved the Kurt Vonnegut shirt!
you convinced me in the first minute that I don't care about this game, yet you force me to watch through 20 minutes for the jokes!
1,500 Plastic Bottles are thrown away every second, of every day. 91% of which are not recycled. Yep, Chip Theory Games should be the target of your sustainabilty virtue. Punch up, boys.
I watched this and thought, "Surely this is a parody of a board game," but apparently it's real.
I think the plastic argument is extremely misguided.
If you actually melted down how much plastic the game uses it would probably be about equivalent to one of those insane kickstarter minis games, if not a little bit lighter. Y'all raved about Eclipse 2e's storage and I would say that game easily has as much if not more plastic than this one.
Ultimately plastic in board games is definitely a big issue and we use way too much of it but calling out a single company for it is misplaced criticism. It'd be like criticising apple in particular for using too much silicon.
But it's more complicated than that - the usage of materials is never *ideal*, but it's aggravated in the instances where the materials don't meaningfully improve the experience.
@@shutupandsitdown I think for a lot of people it does improve the experience. I get that its a subjective thing and subjective things are, yknow, the point of a review channel…
But to use your analogy, its sort of like singling out one racist cousin in your family when half your family is fully as, if not more, racist.
Just seemed like it wouldve been a better spot to criticize the entire industry rather than one studio.
Matt wearing that shirt: "My eyes are down here."
When you guys are tired of burncycle please send it to me! I can’t afford it atm lol and I love Chip Theory Games and would take good care of it :)
I really enjoyed the excellent baton pass from Tom to Matt in the review.
Well done with the ending
You rolled a natural 20.
For once I'm glad I didn't buy the game right before a SUSD review. I think we would've had a similar experience without a distinct campaign mechanism or a narrative to tie things together. That said, the hang up on the components being wasteful is odd to me. Are neoprene and poker chip plastic that much more wasteful than the amount of plastic in TI4, Ankh, or Cthulu Wars? Like, there is more and its excessive by design but its how they justify an $100 price tag and I feel like most games over that price are "wasteful" but it isn't like they're using real fur or something crazy exotic. Honestly, if it wasn't poker chips, it'd be tons of minis. Such is the industry atm
please review crescent moon! it iterates on root in an interesting way
These components are beautiful.
Great review as usual. Think I like the game more now. And about the plastic overproduction, no problem, just don't throw the game in the ocean. When you are done, sell it on the second-hand market instead. Problem solved.
Plastic isn’t bad, it’s one use plastics that are bad
How many plays will the average gamer give this, or any, game?
16:07 my guess, Chip Theory ended up with cheap access to mousepad manufacturing, pivoted to board games after mousepads proved not to sell very well, set up a production chain for a few basic plastic shapes, and stuck with it. (If you have a poker chip injection molding tool, it's really cheap to keep using. But changing the shape requires a whole new tool, which is very expensive.)
Things I am into:
CYBERPUNK
Minis
Heist games
Mini games
Tactical shooters.
And with all of that, i saw this being played in a demo at Origins, paid attention for 30 seconds, laughed and said, “nope!” And walked away.
Felt wrong up front. Glad my instincts served me:):p
How many takes takes did you need until you caught the box?
Cosmic encounter is random, but player interaction drives the narrative, for a co-op game well.....
Italian fanbase is pleased to announce that the "Mamma Mia Hold-A ma Beer-A" has been candidated as a new piece of the national works of art treasurery.
Best regards,
Italian Viewer N.#2432
Every room being mat is the most overproduced shit I have ever seen in a "dungeon crawler"ish board game
I initially read "every room being Matt" and I was like did I really missed that part??
Yeah, they're about twice as thick as a good-quality cardboard piece, and only one-sided. So the rooms alone take up four times as much space as they need to.
The most overproduced shit I've seen in a dungeon crawler is the Cthulhu and Galactus yard gnomes that CMON created. Neoprene tiles have nothing on that level of nonsense.
@@VaultBoy13 While I get what you mean are those really meant to be used frequently? Thought they were more of a show piece that you will put on the wall to collect dust.
this is the second time you've nearly killed me. Choked on my Coco Pops at the hamster comment
I feel Geoff Engelstein would've actually been down with providing some guest-star voice-over :)
Love the ending!
Honestly... This sounds almost like a really good RPG.
Make a game master position to run the bots as a baddy and set up a level.
Tweak some rules to allow more autonomy and when the rules aren't clear... make up a consistent new ruling.