Thanks! We try to create the type of content we would like to see as gamers too, and we don't really back a lot of stuff on Kickstarter, so for us it wouldn't make much sense to lean into that. Besides, our main goal isn't to make money. Doing Kickstarter previews is definitely one of the best ways to do that, but I think we would burn out or lose our passion for this if we made that a priority. We're still board gamers more than we are content creators, if that makes sense.
Just played Oak for the first time - absolutely LOVED it! Definitely one of my favorite worker placement games…can’t wait to play again! Great to see it getting some high praise from you guys :)
Oak is one of my favorites! It's a very modular and tight game. Happy to see it get some more love. The designer also did Bone Wars, which just went to Crowdfunding and I'm looking forward to trying that one as well.
Carlo here. I imagine this question was for Dylann, he's currently away on a work trip and is super busy, I'll try to remember to get him to reply back to this when he can. Thanks for watching!
Such enjoyable content when you are both on together ! I hear you on "Fire & Stone" - I am not a big fan of blind search and discovery either - reminds me of a couple of other games that didn't light my fire upon reading the rules only - Costa Rica (Dunstan) and Africa (Knizia). The latter looks the best of the three, but to me, doesn't meet the standards of his many classics (which I love).
Hmm, I've heard of Costa Rica and Africa but don't know much about either one. I wouldn't have minded the blind discovery aspect in Fire & Stone if the other aspects had delivered in a more satisfying way, especially the caves. But yes, generally when the entire game is centered around blind discovery it can be TOO random. Oh well, onto the next one. Thanks, Tony! - Carlo
Really like Oak. The one place I wish there was more variety is the end of the tree paths. For a game with so much variety, I am surprised that those are the same every game and in the same place.
I like Oak a lot but not sure I would put it in my top 100. It has a bunch of great aspects and super easy to learn and play. Nice theme too and I think druids, covens seems to be a theme that is on the rise. I think an expansion might boost it into the top 100 for me.
Yeah, we're curious to see what the expansion will include. We enjoy the theme quite a bit too, as well as the overall look and components. Thanks for watching!
You should really play Veiled Fate with teams, my group loves it at teams more than "single player". Only player count I havent got to try is the lone wolf variant which is 7 players, would love to see how that plays out.
I’ve thought about getting veiled fate but I get the same opinion from other reviewers. It’s expensive for a game that can be somewhat iffy for players.
Yeah it's definitely pricey, but that's kind of IV Studio's thing. Similar to Chip Theory - high production values, nice components... worth it if you can afford it and will play it enough, but maybe not if it's just a "play once in a while" kind of game. Thanks for watching!
I want to keep my comment positive, really glad you are posting videos again. However, I really disagree with your Fire & Stone assessment. We need to call bad games bad. There is no excuse, Fire & Stone has so many problems and it is not a fun game. There so many good games out there, this one deserves to be forgotten entirely.
Of course we respect your opinion on this, but as I mentioned in response to another similar comment - we created this series so we get to decide what constitutes Own/Play/Skip when we give our verdict. The rough percentages of games that fit into the categories reflects how we feel about games in general. For example - I've played somewhere around 500 unique games at this point, and I would say there's only around 15-20% of those that I regret playing or wish I could get my time back on. Another 15-20% are the really good ones that I'm glad to own (or would like to own if I don't already have a copy. That remaining 60-70% is comprised of games I'm happy I played (either because I enjoyed it, or saw something unique, or had a fun time regardless of certain flaws). And if we look back on all episodes of this series, I think those rough percentages are pretty accurate. Even in this video, where I said all 4 of these games would be "play it" for me, I explained they were at varying levels of enjoyment, with Fire & Stone being the least enjoyable, while explaining my rationale for still being glad I played it. If you want to see games I dislike a lot compared to Fire & Stone, look for past episodes for games we ranked SKIP, such as Maui, Kingdom Rush, Mercado de Lisboa, Castle Party, Copenhagen, etc. There's quite a gap between those games and Fire & Stone, at least for me. Anyway, thanks for watching and supporting the channel! - Carlo
I can't help but think when I hear a criticism like "the early part of this game is boring"... just seems like that's one of those criticisms that applies to every game. And I've never played a game of oceans where the first phase lasts an hour, in my experience it lasts 20 minutes. I think the biggest problem with Oceans and Evolution is that they are actually complex strategic card games that aren't simply set collection (SOOOOOO many card games end up being just set collection) and therefore you need to commit to playing it a lot before it gets it's hooks in you. But we all have board game ADD, so these games are basically screwed, I think all of them other than MTG will over and over again will be marginalized.
To the first part of your comment - I don't agree with you there. If I just look back on the games that made my top 10 of all-time last time we did that last almost a year ago... 1. Games that are exciting right from the very first turn: Agricola, Race for the Galaxy, Keyflower, Hansa Teutonica, Arboretum, Battle Line, The Crew: Mission Deep Sea 2. Games with a few boring/slow turns at the start: Carcassonne, Renature, Modern Art I can think of plenty of other games that fall into each category. Category 1 could also include games like Babylonia, Blue Lagoon, The Voyages of Marco Polo, etc. Category 2 could have games like Tigris & Euphrates (even though I love it), Architects of the West Kingdom, etc. The "problem" with Oceans is that I'm always going to compare it to Evolution: Climate because it's essentially a follow-up game, and even Evolution: Climate is much more interesting right from the start. I appreciate both games for what they are, and I understand why some people prefer Oceans, but every time I play it I just wish I was playing Evolution: Climate instead. I mostly agree with your last point, although I, like many others (probably you too) am looking for the outliers - the games that stand the test of time, that you can play hundreds of times and they get better each time. That's the criteria for most of my favourite games. As always, thanks for weighing in with your thoughts, Paul, and for watching! - Carlo
Oceans was a disappointment for me coming from Evolution : Climate which i think is far superior. Love Veiled Fate, great for a social deduction game that you can play well with 3+ players and not needing 6-8 or more for it to be worth it.
Yeah, I think if the Evolution games hadn't existed, I would've appreciated Oceans a bit more, but after playing Evolution: Climate so many times it just failed to live up to the hype for me. Still a good game, just not a great must-own game for me... and we're really spoiled for choices these days as gamers. - Carlo
I HATE Oceans. My friends love it, and I cringe every time it's suggested for game night. You can't see the score until the end of the game. You can't really win with just the basic cards, you have to use cards from the Deep Deck. The Deep Deck is a deck of all unique, 1-of cards. In order to optimize your turn, you have to know what Deep Deck cards are available and what they do. You have to keep an eye on every card your opponent's play and try your best to make a strategy based on all that information. OR, if you would rather enjoy the game, you basically ignore what everyone is doing and try to optimize your own species...so basically, every one is playing solitaire...together. You can't plan your turns ahead of time because every turn everyone will alter a species and the cards available will change. So, if you really want to optimize, you need to take 10-15 minute turns. Hope you have good enough eye sight to see every card around the table. Then at the end, as I said, since every one's points are hidden, you reveal who won. One player seems to be figuring out a great synergy for his species and you worry he might be in the lead. You don't know for sure, it might be you. Who knows? Since you only have a vague idea where you stand, you never know who to attack, steal from, or leave alone. To me, this game is work.
Even though we like it a bit more than you, these are all pretty valid points. I think we mostly disagree about the Deep deck (we enjoy those cards even if they feel necessary to win) but probably agree on the rest. Thanks for watching!
The first half of Oceans is literally just Evolution though, so its still overall better than Evolution for me. The base card engines have always been samey and uninteresting to me. Oceans fixed the system imo.
I get what you're saying, and comparing the Evolution: Climate cards to the basic cards in Oceans, personally I prefer the ones in Evolution but I understand why people feel differently. The key thing separating these games for me is the fact that Oceans works in these longer turns where each player does a whole bunch of stuff before anyone else gets to go. In Evolution, the simultaneous play throughout the phases means it creates those situations where you don't know which cards are in the food bank, and when players play trait cards they don't get revealed until late in the round so there's more tension and intrigue throughout the game until those reveal points. In Oceans everything just feels more "in the open" and calculable, which I generally dislike in games. Both games are far from perfect, which is why I've recently culled Evolution: Climate from my collection. I loved the game for many years, but after about 15-20 plays I'm ready to move on, and I'd be fine with never playing Oceans again even though it's a decent game. - Carlo
@@AllYouCanBoard for me it's almost the exact opposite. While the simultaneous play is likely slightly quicker, since you receive a new hand every round Evolution is subject to minor AP while the turns zip around just as quick in Oceans and since you're managing a hand you still have an aspect of simultaneous play as you finish your turn and draw new cards to look over while the next player starts their turn. And for tension, the Cambrian explosion and deep cards provide a much more interesting tension than just whether or not a player is trying to make food scarcity happen thereby making the game less fun and interesting for everyone else. I think it's fair to say they're both flawed, but I really don't think Evolution has any substantial advantages over Oceans aside from a slight speed of play. I can understand someone enjoying the base cards over the ones in Oceans but it's purely because the strategies in Evolution are limited making the game static strategically, there are obvious overpowered builds that you will go for every single game, while Oceans cards are actually balanced and situationally important.
LOL “I would be happy to not play it again”. Love that line
A few punches pulled I reckon to avoid saying "just disgusting" 😊
So thrilled you two are back! 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
So happy to see the OG crew back together! ❤
I love this series. I really appreciate that you guys don't go heavy into Kickstarters. These are discussions about games we can go get...or avoid.
Thanks! We try to create the type of content we would like to see as gamers too, and we don't really back a lot of stuff on Kickstarter, so for us it wouldn't make much sense to lean into that.
Besides, our main goal isn't to make money. Doing Kickstarter previews is definitely one of the best ways to do that, but I think we would burn out or lose our passion for this if we made that a priority. We're still board gamers more than we are content creators, if that makes sense.
Glad to see you al back!
Yeah!!!! You guys are back!!!!!
Missed you guys! Happy to have you back 💕
Just played Oak for the first time - absolutely LOVED it! Definitely one of my favorite worker placement games…can’t wait to play again! Great to see it getting some high praise from you guys :)
Woowhoo! New AYCB videos.
Oak is one of my favorites! It's a very modular and tight game. Happy to see it get some more love. The designer also did Bone Wars, which just went to Crowdfunding and I'm looking forward to trying that one as well.
Thanks for the heads up about Bone Wars! We didn't know he had another design already. We'll definitely take a look at that one.
Great to see you guys gain!
Veiled Fate is best at team games. I've played it close to ten times. The team games are definitely my favorite.
Good to know! We definitely want to try the team version once we get enough people together.
Happy to see you guys pop up on TH-cam! Great video!
GREAT to see you back guys! I've really missed your content.
Thanks for the kind words and for being such a devoted, longtime supporter of the channel! Plenty more videos coming soon.
Missed you guys! Glad to see you’re back!
Nice to have You back! May I ask whois Youre favorite hero for Marvel champions true solo?
Carlo here. I imagine this question was for Dylann, he's currently away on a work trip and is super busy, I'll try to remember to get him to reply back to this when he can. Thanks for watching!
I was thinking about you two. Hope you’re doing well.
Nice to see you again. Most Carlo of course. We got things in common 🙂
Good to see you guys together.
Such enjoyable content when you are both on together !
I hear you on "Fire & Stone" - I am not a big fan of blind search and discovery either - reminds me of a couple of other games that didn't light my fire upon reading the rules only - Costa Rica (Dunstan) and Africa (Knizia). The latter looks the best of the three, but to me, doesn't meet the standards of his many classics (which I love).
Hmm, I've heard of Costa Rica and Africa but don't know much about either one. I wouldn't have minded the blind discovery aspect in Fire & Stone if the other aspects had delivered in a more satisfying way, especially the caves. But yes, generally when the entire game is centered around blind discovery it can be TOO random. Oh well, onto the next one. Thanks, Tony!
- Carlo
Really like Oak. The one place I wish there was more variety is the end of the tree paths. For a game with so much variety, I am surprised that those are the same every game and in the same place.
That's totally fair, and I agree with you. I wonder if that was simply overlooked or if they considered it and decided to leave it that way.
- Carlo
I like Oak a lot but not sure I would put it in my top 100. It has a bunch of great aspects and super easy to learn and play. Nice theme too and I think druids, covens seems to be a theme that is on the rise. I think an expansion might boost it into the top 100 for me.
Yeah, we're curious to see what the expansion will include. We enjoy the theme quite a bit too, as well as the overall look and components. Thanks for watching!
Love these.
You should really play Veiled Fate with teams, my group loves it at teams more than "single player". Only player count I havent got to try is the lone wolf variant which is 7 players, would love to see how that plays out.
I’ve thought about getting veiled fate but I get the same opinion from other reviewers. It’s expensive for a game that can be somewhat iffy for players.
Yeah it's definitely pricey, but that's kind of IV Studio's thing. Similar to Chip Theory - high production values, nice components... worth it if you can afford it and will play it enough, but maybe not if it's just a "play once in a while" kind of game.
Thanks for watching!
I havent forgotten Carlo. I will get my vengeance!
We'll see about that!
I want to keep my comment positive, really glad you are posting videos again. However, I really disagree with your Fire & Stone assessment. We need to call bad games bad. There is no excuse, Fire & Stone has so many problems and it is not a fun game. There so many good games out there, this one deserves to be forgotten entirely.
Of course we respect your opinion on this, but as I mentioned in response to another similar comment - we created this series so we get to decide what constitutes Own/Play/Skip when we give our verdict. The rough percentages of games that fit into the categories reflects how we feel about games in general.
For example - I've played somewhere around 500 unique games at this point, and I would say there's only around 15-20% of those that I regret playing or wish I could get my time back on. Another 15-20% are the really good ones that I'm glad to own (or would like to own if I don't already have a copy. That remaining 60-70% is comprised of games I'm happy I played (either because I enjoyed it, or saw something unique, or had a fun time regardless of certain flaws). And if we look back on all episodes of this series, I think those rough percentages are pretty accurate.
Even in this video, where I said all 4 of these games would be "play it" for me, I explained they were at varying levels of enjoyment, with Fire & Stone being the least enjoyable, while explaining my rationale for still being glad I played it.
If you want to see games I dislike a lot compared to Fire & Stone, look for past episodes for games we ranked SKIP, such as Maui, Kingdom Rush, Mercado de Lisboa, Castle Party, Copenhagen, etc. There's quite a gap between those games and Fire & Stone, at least for me.
Anyway, thanks for watching and supporting the channel!
- Carlo
Sweet!
It slowed? Honestly, it feels like i just saw you guys last week!
And how glorious it was...
I can't help but think when I hear a criticism like "the early part of this game is boring"... just seems like that's one of those criticisms that applies to every game. And I've never played a game of oceans where the first phase lasts an hour, in my experience it lasts 20 minutes.
I think the biggest problem with Oceans and Evolution is that they are actually complex strategic card games that aren't simply set collection (SOOOOOO many card games end up being just set collection) and therefore you need to commit to playing it a lot before it gets it's hooks in you. But we all have board game ADD, so these games are basically screwed, I think all of them other than MTG will over and over again will be marginalized.
To the first part of your comment - I don't agree with you there. If I just look back on the games that made my top 10 of all-time last time we did that last almost a year ago...
1. Games that are exciting right from the very first turn: Agricola, Race for the Galaxy, Keyflower, Hansa Teutonica, Arboretum, Battle Line, The Crew: Mission Deep Sea
2. Games with a few boring/slow turns at the start: Carcassonne, Renature, Modern Art
I can think of plenty of other games that fall into each category. Category 1 could also include games like Babylonia, Blue Lagoon, The Voyages of Marco Polo, etc. Category 2 could have games like Tigris & Euphrates (even though I love it), Architects of the West Kingdom, etc.
The "problem" with Oceans is that I'm always going to compare it to Evolution: Climate because it's essentially a follow-up game, and even Evolution: Climate is much more interesting right from the start. I appreciate both games for what they are, and I understand why some people prefer Oceans, but every time I play it I just wish I was playing Evolution: Climate instead.
I mostly agree with your last point, although I, like many others (probably you too) am looking for the outliers - the games that stand the test of time, that you can play hundreds of times and they get better each time. That's the criteria for most of my favourite games.
As always, thanks for weighing in with your thoughts, Paul, and for watching!
- Carlo
Great video! I heard oak plays well solo, too!
We haven't tried it solo but I keep hearing the same thing. Thanks for watching!
- Carlo
Oceans was a disappointment for me coming from Evolution : Climate which i think is far superior. Love Veiled Fate, great for a social deduction game that you can play well with 3+ players and not needing 6-8 or more for it to be worth it.
Yeah, I think if the Evolution games hadn't existed, I would've appreciated Oceans a bit more, but after playing Evolution: Climate so many times it just failed to live up to the hype for me. Still a good game, just not a great must-own game for me... and we're really spoiled for choices these days as gamers.
- Carlo
I HATE Oceans.
My friends love it, and I cringe every time it's suggested for game night.
You can't see the score until the end of the game.
You can't really win with just the basic cards, you have to use cards from the Deep Deck.
The Deep Deck is a deck of all unique, 1-of cards.
In order to optimize your turn, you have to know what Deep Deck cards are available and what they do. You have to keep an eye on every card your opponent's play and try your best to make a strategy based on all that information.
OR, if you would rather enjoy the game, you basically ignore what everyone is doing and try to optimize your own species...so basically, every one is playing solitaire...together.
You can't plan your turns ahead of time because every turn everyone will alter a species and the cards available will change. So, if you really want to optimize, you need to take 10-15 minute turns. Hope you have good enough eye sight to see every card around the table.
Then at the end, as I said, since every one's points are hidden, you reveal who won.
One player seems to be figuring out a great synergy for his species and you worry he might be in the lead. You don't know for sure, it might be you. Who knows?
Since you only have a vague idea where you stand, you never know who to attack, steal from, or leave alone.
To me, this game is work.
Even though we like it a bit more than you, these are all pretty valid points. I think we mostly disagree about the Deep deck (we enjoy those cards even if they feel necessary to win) but probably agree on the rest.
Thanks for watching!
The first half of Oceans is literally just Evolution though, so its still overall better than Evolution for me. The base card engines have always been samey and uninteresting to me. Oceans fixed the system imo.
I get what you're saying, and comparing the Evolution: Climate cards to the basic cards in Oceans, personally I prefer the ones in Evolution but I understand why people feel differently.
The key thing separating these games for me is the fact that Oceans works in these longer turns where each player does a whole bunch of stuff before anyone else gets to go. In Evolution, the simultaneous play throughout the phases means it creates those situations where you don't know which cards are in the food bank, and when players play trait cards they don't get revealed until late in the round so there's more tension and intrigue throughout the game until those reveal points. In Oceans everything just feels more "in the open" and calculable, which I generally dislike in games.
Both games are far from perfect, which is why I've recently culled Evolution: Climate from my collection. I loved the game for many years, but after about 15-20 plays I'm ready to move on, and I'd be fine with never playing Oceans again even though it's a decent game.
- Carlo
@@AllYouCanBoard for me it's almost the exact opposite. While the simultaneous play is likely slightly quicker, since you receive a new hand every round Evolution is subject to minor AP while the turns zip around just as quick in Oceans and since you're managing a hand you still have an aspect of simultaneous play as you finish your turn and draw new cards to look over while the next player starts their turn.
And for tension, the Cambrian explosion and deep cards provide a much more interesting tension than just whether or not a player is trying to make food scarcity happen thereby making the game less fun and interesting for everyone else.
I think it's fair to say they're both flawed, but I really don't think Evolution has any substantial advantages over Oceans aside from a slight speed of play. I can understand someone enjoying the base cards over the ones in Oceans but it's purely because the strategies in Evolution are limited making the game static strategically, there are obvious overpowered builds that you will go for every single game, while Oceans cards are actually balanced and situationally important.