Games We Didn't Like...but why they're good anyway.

[Eliahad]

I'm distinctly remembering two games that we played at GENCON last year. The Little Dead Riding Hood game that could die a fiery death...and also that 5 minute "Showdown" card game that we played at the game store. I think we all, collectively thought they were horrible. But I'm pretty sure there was some aspect about them we did like, or at least, their designers liked enough to attempt to publish the game.

I'm going to come back here later and see if I can find it.

(Before I come back and write more in depth: I'm pretty sure the biggest problem with Little Dead was the rulebook. I'm pretty sure the positive for the card game was that you only needed 5 minutes to play it.)

[Bluedevyl]

I think the other thing that played very strongly against LDRH was the way that it was presented, at least to our group. That guy wanted to be ANYWHERE other than where he was right then. I get it, everyone has bad days, but his staggering level of disinterest made it harder to find the roses amongst the thorns.

[Mike]

Little Dead felt like a lack of playtesting. The wolves were clearly meant to be important, but they came off as a minor annoyance. We have Red Riding Hood packing heat, yet all the other background characters seemed straight-up fairy tale. It was uneven in tone and play. It just wasn't done baking.

On the other hand, the ability to build a forest maze cooperatively as part of a competition was pretty nifty. Had the wolves been a little more plentiful and the bullets less so... maybe.

[Bluedevyl]

My memory might be a bit foggy, but I think I won our game of LDRH without ever having entered combat.