Not every board game treats its setting as a condiment. Some are designed to engage on historical, social, or polemical grounds. To evaluate such a game principally as a jumble of mechanisms would fail to engage with it as created, presented, intended, and, yes, as it plays.
I've always found this argument weird and pompous—that theme/setting is entirely irrelevant to a game design. I would say it's an entirely Vulcan way to engage with games, but I feel like that's selling Vulcans' emotions short. Sure, dude. And when I play video games, I prefer all ones and zeros.
I feel like the really great boardgames, the ones that really floor you with how intricately they are designed, are the ones that marry setting and mechanics in a way that makes you go "Oh, yeah. That makes sense!"
Same for videogames, actually!
i only discovered Obsession a few days ago, and thought your piece on how its theme flowed through its whole design was superb
Thanks! That's very kind of you to say.
It also ignores how the mechanisms interact with the theme. A game can have great mechanisms, but if it is disconnected from the theme, it will be weaker for it.
There’s gotta be some deep irony in defining theme as a condiment given how important (both culturally and aesthetically) some condiments are in defining dishes.
(This is aimed at the OP… of course)
This absolutely unhinged human is out there in the world eating completely dry hot dogs
[sigh] I prefer my hot dogs without condiments. I'm sorry.
All I mean to say is, one behavior does not follow the other.
I dunno, not sure a hater of condiments can be trusted :)
hi i also eat my hot dogs plain
My boss's fake DJ name is DJ Plain Buns for this same reason. Welcome to his fan club
Omg deceased
LOL, Calvin!
yes, how dare you spend so much time on theme and setting in your review of a phil eklund game
I completely agree. Sure, some settings could indeed be seen as a little bit of spice and flavour. However, there are settings that need to be treated with sensitivity and care by the game, especially historical settings, and therefore need to be considered in a review. 🙂👍
Sure, that may be the design basis or even the intent and presentation, but nothing requires the players to be aware of or engage those aspects, or for them to have any effect on the resulting game. You may decry that narrowness of focus and context, but they are playing the game per the rules.
Yes! And even a game designed mechanics-first may not stay that way - like a sculptor looks at a piece of stone or wood and thinks about the shape it wants to be, a game designer may look at a jumble of mechanisms to find themes & settings it seems primed for, then take the design in that direction.
Wow. “Theme is a condiment.” When wargamers dump on Euros, it’s always for exactly this reason. The theme is pasted on. I had no idea that lack of theme was actually desirable for some board gamers.
Yet fandom forbid that said 'pasted on themes' show...the full brunt of the theme. I love the detail that the village chronicle has of tearmarks of where your family members go when they die in Village (non-big box version, at least), as an example
I wish to see more people who write critic pieces as yours, and not only in the tabletop space. Too many reviewers miss the sum for a single part of the design.
Thanks for that, Marta, that's very kind of you to say!
Fortunately this dude’s sentence is to be condemned to a game group of folks like him.
I'd say, what really makes games special as an art form is that it puts people right into the action. They're actively engaging, not passively spectating. But this engagement is primarily with the mechanisms. If theme is more interesting than the systems, I'd rather read a book.
It’s funny… I don’t care for reviews that are dry descriptions of mechanics alone, but I never feel compelled to leave a comment on them asking for “more fluff!”
As someone who spent the better part of 6 years making a game that is entirely and inseparably designed around its theme and the implications of said theme, this comment makes me vaguely annoyed.
That said, what this person is really saying is "I wanted a review that told me this game was awesome because I need validation of my pre-held fandom. It did not do that, therefore I must conjure up a reason as to why the critic is wrong, rather than actually engaging with his work"
Yes.
A painting is simply varying proportions of colours. It does not matter if it represents an oceanside sunset or a killing field. It only matters what colours it contains.
I'm not playing for emotional engagement. I'm playing to understand the system and how others understand it, to manage one against the other, and thus beat them. Gameplay.
Okay??
So yeah, just the colours matter...in terms of what they can abrade from the players.
Argumentatively, I think their definition is too broad. Lots of things that we wouldn't call games are collections of interlocking mechanisms. I'd much rather play a game with fun little pew pew miniatures than fight in an actual war, though both are systems that generate interesting decisions.
The sequel! Like I said, I saw this in the wild and responded pretty much immediately. There's something about the comment that's atavistic and viscerally upsetting to a lot of people. It's very last decade.
Saw the comment in the wild and my eyes rolled into the back of my head. "Is it worth $60?" "Is it fun?"
Certainly, some games are an assembly of mechanics designed to create interesting decisions...and I love many of them, but to say that is all games should ever be is ridiculous.
I'm not a game designer but if I was I think I can't imagine anything more insulting than someone describing my game like this?
what a depressing way to approach games, imo: a collection of mechanisms that need no theme
If this were how it always worked, I wouldn’t be so obsessed with games.
Perhaps this person is stating that this is how theme feels to him? If so, the comment is valid. If not, then who cares what he thinks because this obviously isn’t true.
Sure. In this case, he's saying I'm wrong to write reviews that delve into a game's topic as opposed to purely its mechanical systems.
P.S. I won an award for best condiment today! I guess he won't like my game.
Congratulations! I'm a condiment man myself!
But are you secretly the Condiment King?
Sadly, no. I'm only the Board Game Decider.
Please advise him that he should just consult ChatGPT for that info. Plus, it will tell him what he wants to hear and also that he's a good boy and a smart boy and everyone loves him.
As a game designer, if you haven't just smashed 3 or 4 game mechanics together like they're kissing, and then named it after a random word from the dictionary, what are you even doing with your life?