Beiträge von Sankt Peter im Thema „Replayability“

  • Replayability

    Am Beispiel Pulsar 2849 habe ich bei BGG zum Thema Replayability eine interessante Aussage gefunden:


    Zitat

    I’ve been meaning to finish a blog about the myth (false news?) of replayability for some time and Pulsar 2849 is a good example of my issue with it in modern gaming. Despite adding a lot of cardboard to the box to make each game ‘different’, nothing really changes. Bonus tiles may make certain strategies slightly more effective game to game, while you may also be led slightly by the tech trees available to you, but overall it’s not enough to make today’s gyrodyne strategy feel different to tomorrow’s.


    Quelle: Pulsar 2849: A four-sided game review | Pulsar 2849 | BoardGameGeek


    Stimmt schon irgendwie. Aber was macht dann den Wiederspielreiz aus? Mehr Material und unterschiedliche Startaufstellungen sind anscheinend nicht das alleinige Mittel.


    Er schreibt später:

    Zitat

    But I still see more replayability in mechanisms and opponents than in adding piles of extra components – which is why people are still playing the likes of Puerto Rico, Tigris and Brass after all these years.


    Wie seht ihr das?