by xipuloxx
sfox wrote:
xipuloxx wrote:
mfaulk80 wrote:
HarbingerOfDuh wrote:
xipuloxx wrote:
(Also, you think Power Grid is a very good 2-players game? Really?)
sfox wrote:
Except for Puerto Rico and Terra Mystica, eight of the top 10 strategy games are very good 2 player games.
Paging Dr. Reading Comprehension ... :what:
?
I don't get it either.
Eight of the top 10 games apart from those two means all the other top 10 games (because 10-2=8 :p). Which includes Power Grid. Which is widely regarded as an excellent game, but not very good with 2 players. It's possible Shawn disagrees and thinks it is excellent with 2, but if so I'm surprised. That's all I was saying there. What's the issue with reading, or comprehension?
Or is it because Shawn is suddenly talking about the top strategy games rather than top games in general? Assuming that was deliberate, Power Grid is in the top 10 for both, so it makes no difference.
The ? was meant for HarbingerOfDuh's response, not mine. It is both for the offensive nature of that reply as well as a general 'what are you talking about'. My reply was clearly just pointing out that we were saying different things.
OK, before anyone gets any more confused, I was actually talking about HarbingerOfDuh's response too! That was what I was saying I didn't get.
We were both clearly talking about the top 10 strategy games, as those are the ones you listed in your reply.[/]
BGG has separate rankings for different categories of games, including "strategy games". The top 10 I was referring to was not the top 10 strategy games but the "ordinary" top 10. (In fact the only real difference is that it includes Brass instead of Mage Knight.)
It doesn't really matter, I was just wondering if that was what HarbingerOfDuh was referring to -- the fact that it was possible I was talking about one top 10 while you were talking about another!
You claimed that eight of the top 10 were "very good 2 player games". I was pointing out Power Grid as an exception (generally not regarded as very good with 2 players, even by its fans), to show that your statement wasn't true.
Of course I do, but we may have different ideas about what "recommended" means compared to "best". To me, "recommended" means a game is good at that player count, but not excellent, because you're not seeing it at its best.
That's a nice hypothesis, but there are plenty of people who rarely or never play 2-player, too. And from what I've seen, I'd say most people do both.
Besides, I don't think the top games do have a preponderance of 2-player games. This is my core point that I keep making. I'd want to see some evidence that 2-player games automatically do better before believing it's so. All I've seen is your unsupported opinion.
To drag this back on-topic, you seemed to be implying that Castles of Burgundy was only popular because it's a good 2-player game. I see no reason to believe that's so.
BGG has separate rankings for different categories of games, including "strategy games". The top 10 I was referring to was not the top 10 strategy games but the "ordinary" top 10. (In fact the only real difference is that it includes Brass instead of Mage Knight.)
It doesn't really matter, I was just wondering if that was what HarbingerOfDuh was referring to -- the fact that it was possible I was talking about one top 10 while you were talking about another!
I've never played Power Grid as 2 player, but I don't like that game in general anyway and question it being in the top 10 strategy games. I also think Eclipse is an awful game, but that is a completely different topic than what we are discussing.
You claimed that eight of the top 10 were "very good 2 player games". I was pointing out Power Grid as an exception (generally not regarded as very good with 2 players, even by its fans), to show that your statement wasn't true.
As to 'best' vs. 'recommended' number of players, I very frequently play games with player counts that fall into the 'recommended' category... I'm sure you do as well.
Of course I do, but we may have different ideas about what "recommended" means compared to "best". To me, "recommended" means a game is good at that player count, but not excellent, because you're not seeing it at its best.
Many people are not members of large gaming groups where it is easy to find 4/5/6 players for a game. The most common gaming partner for them is their spouse, is my point. If a game doesn't work well as a 2 player, those people will never play it, and thus they will never vote on it. More votes = higher BGG rating, therefore the conclusion that working well as a 2 player game results in a higher rating on BGG.
That's a nice hypothesis, but there are plenty of people who rarely or never play 2-player, too. And from what I've seen, I'd say most people do both.
Besides, I don't think the top games do have a preponderance of 2-player games. This is my core point that I keep making. I'd want to see some evidence that 2-player games automatically do better before believing it's so. All I've seen is your unsupported opinion.
To drag this back on-topic, you seemed to be implying that Castles of Burgundy was only popular because it's a good 2-player game. I see no reason to believe that's so.
