Another game that hit the table this holidays was The Game of Things, a similar word/party game from 2002 that did not receive much positive acclaim at all and currently sits lower that 3500 in the BGG rankings.  This is pretty alarming considering thay Just One, a similar game, is well within the Top 500. 

So what went wrong? Sometimes subtle differences are the problem for a game this simple, just a slight rules tweak or a feeling that it isn’t running smoothly enough. But what specifically is it for Things? 

The Game

The Game of Things is a simple word game, a cue card is revealed by The Reader (changing each round) and each player answers the question on a slip of paper. The Reader then reads all the responses, including their own and then the person to their left guesses who wrote what. If you are matched to your answer you are eliminated for the round. Players must remember the answers until the answers have gone around the group once, at which point they can be repeated once. 

What went wrong? 

I have to break this down into two parts, the game itself and also the other factors. This game was released by Hasbro and Parker Bros in many parts, so was given the best chance to succeed given the exposure to big box stores.  

Game Factors

• This is a pure guessing game with no other reference you are expected to know what someone else wrote; 
• Elimination plays a part in this game. A party game that eliminates people seems to fly totally in the face of the core concept of a party game, especially the way this game does it. If you are guessed, you are out of the round making it hard to ever catch up with scoring; 
• The memory element is useless and means that some players (in a party environment) may not have heard the answers, or may not have a great memory. You know what? Tough luck, you can hear them again after a round of the table, at which point you may well have been eliminated. 

Other Factors

My copy of the game came in a chunky wooden box with a plastic insert. It was simply too heavy and unwieldy for a game that is essentially some cards and scoring and answer pads. I don’t see why the decision was made to put it in a box like this, but it’s definitely not a selling point. 

Another bizarre point is that the makers had patented the word ‘Things…’ and were sending cease and desist letters to any other maker who was making a game with the word ‘Things..’ in the title. Although this was several years after the release, it seems to be a rather aggressive strategy towards designers in the same field for a word that is very common.  

Is it a Forgotten Gem? 

Sometimes a game gets released at the wrong time or has a poor marketing plan, or just fails to impress the right people at the right time. Was this the case for Game of Things? Most surely not. There were already word games around at this time (such as Apples to Apples) and I don’t believe that the wooden box presentation added much to the perceived quality of the game overall. 

As for the game itself, it’s just not great, the memory component is frustrating and the fun is only there if players are actively trying to be audacious, but that only makes the answers silly and doesn’t really have anything to do with making this into an actual game. My opinion – grab some silly questions off the internet and ask your friends in a roundtable discussion, it will be far more fun than this game. 

The post Why it didn’t rate – The Game of Things appeared first on Next Player.

A game by the team that created The 7th Continent must be a pretty complex and immersive game, right? Well not particularly so. Unlike some of the major creators who have stuck in their wheel house whether it be Economic simulators or Tile laying games, this creation is different. Not that there is anything wrong with this, but Ludovic Roudy and Bruno Sautter have created a game here that could be nothing further from their opus.

Just One is a seriously simple game. Up to 7 players each receive a writing slate and pen, the start player the picks a card (from the 13 for a game) and places it facing away from them. Each card has words 1-5 one them, with the start player announcing a number, the other players determine the corresponding word.

It is then up to the rest of the team to write down a single word that will help the guesser to find the target word. Simple. Before the guesser gets a chance to see the clues, however, everyone else compares clues and if there are any duplicates then these clues are removed from the game. This leads to a wonderful question of whether you should go with the most obvious, or with a more obscure reference.

The decision of what word to play is truly where this game shines, do you go for the obvious or is that what everyone else will do, thus leaving a small amount of clues. Or is that what everything else is thinking and therefore going for the obvious is going to be the best choice? This constant internal back and forth is what creates pressure and tension but also leads to clues that are so far out that you have to wonder what the clue giver is even thinking.

Depth and Replayability

With a massive stack of clue cards, each with five words on them this game has some serious legs in terms of replayability, even for the same gaming group or family. 

I have played this game with several groups from children to adults and a mix and this game has never failed to impress. I’m not saying that this is an incredible, in depth game that warrants the attention of all hobby players, but moreso that this game hits all the right notes for a fun experience for a game night. It hits a happy medium between ‘Family’ and ‘Party’ game allowing you to get rowdy if you want, but also a more reserved and strategic game is also possible.

Overall

One minor complaint about the game is that it can be a little awkward in terms of scoring at the end as it seems a bit anticlimactic. A perfect round is 13 correct guesses, all the way down to zero, but this scoring isn’t measured against anything else, just a “Hey we got 10 right well done” seems to be the way to end the game. Although, some pre-empting of ‘This is the last round’ would probably avoid some of this awkwardness.

Overall though I would very highly recommend this game for any player of games and it has the potential to be a new classic evergreen game. This game well deserves it’s status as the Spiel des Jahres winner this year, so if you are at all on the fence I really think that you should pick this one up or give it a try. 

The post Just One review appeared first on Next Player.