Matt | Don't Eat the MeeplesPlay more weird games
Seven great games that are just a bit weird.| Newsletter | https://www.donteatthemeeples.com |
| https://instagram.com/donteatthemeeples |
matt
- 82 Followers
- 73 Following
- 195 Posts
Board games by night, coding by day. And sometimes also night.
Suboptimal play, Dominion and me
Do I love playing games poorly, or do I love to experiment? You be the judge.https://www.donteatthemeeples.com/suboptimal-play-dominion-and-me/
I finally made the jump to Ghost from Substack, and while I think there might be a little slowdown in my newsletter's growth, I think it's a good thing for good reasons.
But from a technology perspective, it's hard not to be just very pleased about this. An ActivityPub integration, full templating and a usable API — it's such a breath of fresh air.
If you're interested in reading more of my Wyrmspan thoughts, and my thoughts about the other two games, here's a link — https://donteatthemeeples.substack.com/p/wyrmspan-river-valley-glassworks-nocturne
Sometimes I end up writing about a lot of newly released games, which I personally enjoy — but I'm always a bit worried about getting caught in that old 'cult of the new' mindset. It's an easy one to fall into, but at the same time, I also just adore new designs and new experiences.
This week in my newsletter, I wrote about three of my favorite games from 2024 (so far): Wyrmspan, Nocturne and River Valley Glassworks. I'll link in a subsequent post.
Wyrmspan is such an interesting case for me. I'd largely moved past Wingpsna — I get why it works for a lot of people, and I think I get what doesn't work for me: too much variation in goals and your goals being tied too directly to the cards that end up coming out; given there are so many cards, it's always a question if you'll get the cards you need.
Wyrmspan feels like it addresses that for my play style. With that comes some extra complexity — not a ton — but enough to help the game fly. (Ha.)
I wrote about Daybreak in my most recent newsletter, too.
https://donteatthemeeples.substack.com/p/daybreaks-shining-cooperative-play
Finally, this game gives me that "one more turn" feeling so strongly. I find myself wanting to continue working through the deck of local projects and craft an even stronger engine. That's such a good feeling in a game.
It's inevitable that a game with a local area you focus on would get that 'multiplayer solitaire' tag, but I think that misses a point the game's making. If you want to succeed in Daybreak, you have to coordinate and communicate — there's so much information going around at any given point that you'll end up struggling to coordinate and communicate. It won't happen naturally. You have to step back and communicate, because the game won't force you to. Maybe it doesn't incentivize communication enough (though I think winning is incentive.)
That's another way the game works thematically: Coordination and communication are key to climate action. Individual efforts aren't enough. I like the way the game doesn't force cooperative action, but it gives you the tools to do so.
Sure, the cross-player coordination isn't particularly huge in scope, but I think that's OK. This game has a vision for what it wants to be, and that's a game where action is taken locally, but coordination has to happen globally.
Daybreak, the latest cooperative effort from Matt Leacock, who co-designed the game with Matteo Menapace, is really good, and the way it integrates the theme into play is really, really interesting. That's not what I would have told you the first, second or third time I played the game. (I thought it was really good, but thematic? Less so.)
Daybreak, a cooperative game about climate change, can feel a little like there are a million cards, and you won't succeed if you don't narrow your focus — that's the game's machinations being akin to climate action, for me. Broad and shallow solutions hold less value than specific, actionable solutions.