Home › Forums › News, Rumours & General Discussion › Is it time for some more critical analysis of rule sets › Reply To: Is it time for some more critical analysis of rule sets
I know this isnt directly aimed at SPQR but i jumped on SPQR (from OTT no less) because the models looked great and i figured at the price i was paying the rules were essentially ‘free’ so i took the risk. But i do see Warlord doing this a lot, very minimal lets plays or run throughs of there new games expecting people to buy blind and i just dont see the sense in this. Im not expecting a water tight tournament ruleset from the off and im quite lenient when it comes to how tight a rules system is but erratas and FAQs mere days after release shows that its not quite ready for a majority of people yet.
Like many of you have alluded to if we stop funding the poor games they will eventually get better. I didnt jump in on sharpe practice until i had watched a few lets plays by the OTT team, then decided i quite enjoyed the mechanics and got my copy. I didnt wade in on cruel seas (i was very tempted) but i waited until the lets plays were out and then decided it wasnt for me.
The unboxings are just that showing you whats in the box, its the lets plays that help me decide on a good game, and i want the producers there showing me the best the game can be (a demo by proxy if you like). I dont rely on either player of the lets plays to tell me its good or bad (as i do find theyre always quite positive) i see if I think its good or bad, if they havent covered enough content i watch another lets play somwhere else.
Like most of us i have plenty of other games to be playing so i can afford to be very selective on which new games i jump in on.
I’m not going to add anything really to what you guys have already said but wanted to chip in. I feel we need to be more careful regarding the games we jump in on and remember the models may be shiny but the rules are just as important (if not more so).
