Reply To: Is it time for some more critical analysis of rule sets

[limburger 21710xp 0]

I think the “Let’s play” videos combined with the ‘a round breakdown’ definitely do give a good feel for what the game (can be) like.

Support by developers does help, but at the same time it can be considered advertising instead of a review as there is relation between reviewers (OTT) and producers. Add to  this the webshop activities and things can get a bit tricky.
I know the team is doing their best with the resources available and their heart is definitely in the right place.

It has to be said that some developers/companies have better / more hobby friendly PR persons than others.

Any company worth a damn is going to be updating rules as the game matures, so while it might not be perfect at release (and it certainly won’t be if it is a v1 of a product) there’s always a chance for them to tweak the game afterwards. That’s something that requires a long term approach (like a short review at 6 months intervals after release) and it is an underrated aspect.

@torros I think the problem with SPQR is more one of presentation and management of expectations from their side.
The newletters introducing the game and the website made it feel like they were going through the motions of getting the information out there which is at odds with the release of a starter set for a new product.  That’s not a good thing in a market that has a few skirmish rule sets that manage to target both historical ‘experts’ as well as beginners.