by rickert
kaziam wrote:
As far as the defense that "King of Tokyo is not for everybody...blah, blah...rethemed Yahtzee..blah, blah...not for those who want to feel intellectually superior..."
(Deep breath)
Ask yourself this:
If this game was named King of Tokyo Yahtzee, would it have gained any awards on BGG or even have broken into the ratings at all?
If this game did not have Richard Garfield's name attached, would it have made any inroads with hobby gamers?
I suggest that King of Tokyo is a massive BGG groupthink experiment/marketing ploy to see if everyone would buy into a Yahtzee variant being an amazing hobby game with mass appeal.
The million dollar question is:
If you gave King of Tokyo an 8, 9 or 10, how high do you rate Yahtzee?
(Deep breath)
Ask yourself this:
If this game was named King of Tokyo Yahtzee, would it have gained any awards on BGG or even have broken into the ratings at all?
If this game did not have Richard Garfield's name attached, would it have made any inroads with hobby gamers?
I suggest that King of Tokyo is a massive BGG groupthink experiment/marketing ploy to see if everyone would buy into a Yahtzee variant being an amazing hobby game with mass appeal.
The million dollar question is:
If you gave King of Tokyo an 8, 9 or 10, how high do you rate Yahtzee?
Or it is like if you rate Dominion 7, 8 or 10, then what do you rate Thunderstone or any other deckbuilders? That last argument is a bit pathetic. The ONLY thing that ties Yahtzee and King of Tokyo is that both use dice that get re-rolled. That's a very weak tie in my opinion. If we are to make that tie substantial, then the ratings of every CCG for every BGGer would need to be similar if not the same; every worker placement as well. One similar trait doesn't tie two games together nor the quality of those games and people who say so are making a weak, lazy point.