Monday, June 5, 2017

Am I a hypocrite with card adaptations?

Last year, I tried Castles of Burgundy the Card Game on Yucat√°. I skimmed through the rules, missed some of them and didn't have a very good time. But I knew part of the problem was I messed up the rules so I'm trying again.

And, yes, actually carefully reading the rules makes everything make sense and I feel like I can actually say I'm playing the game.

I have promised myself that I will play it ten times before I come to a final conclusion. However, so far, compared to the board game, I am finding it fairly meh.

Pictures of the physical game being played aren't helping my impression of it. It looks like, despite the small box size, it takes a up a lot to table space in play. And that is a minus for me when it comes to a card adaptation of a boardgame.

At the same time, I am forced to ask myself if I would feel so meh if the card version was the first version I tried or if I didn't own the board game already.

After all, Euphrates and Tigris: Contest of Kings has stayed in my collection and it has just about every flaw I've accused Castles of Burgundy the Card Game of. It's definitely not as good as it's board game parent, Tigris and Euphrates. It takes up a silly amount of table space.

However, I don't actually own the board game. Truth to tell, only one or two people in my old gaming group did. So the card version both gives me a way to occasionally enjoy that Tigris and Euphrates flavor and I have managed to compress it down to a small plastic photo box for storage.

On the one hand, Tigris and Euphrates has never seen a lot of play in any of my groups. On the other hand, Castles of Burgundy has.

What I need to do is keep on playing it over and over again online. Give it a chance to stand on its own mechanically. Then, I need to actually try and get a face to face game in with a physical copy. Only then, will I really know if it's something that I enjoy or something I want to get.

No comments:

Post a Comment