"Booker" is French for "auteur"

Gratulation!

With the appropiate salt, since I havent played it: From what I got abput Vantage its more of the bg equivalent of an Choose-your-own-adventure book. More open than those, but nevertheless a bookish experience.

I understand the urge to design those games - as I said, its impressive - but I dont necessarily haven an urge to play them
(actually I came to the conclusion while pondering how I would design an open world game and then discovered that I simply wouldnt :-I)

To clarify: I love exploration, but its hard to implement surprises in a game, bc of a) rules and b) by definition you cant plan for surprises, so agency has to archieved differently.
So I prefer exploration as a part of a game, not as the game itself.

I dont think generally the creation of the world is the problem. Yes,what I get from ER is that the Worlds are interesting to explore.But exploration is, by itself, not an interesting mechanism (its motivating, because of the surprises -which I love-not bc of the way it works if that makes sense).

No, but mainly bc I heard its best 1-2 players (also its not easy to learn) and I usually play with 3+

Best answer

Unfortunetly it still sits unplayed in my collection

I post a million pieces, and I wont go back
But now Im seeing all the beauty in the broken jokes
The jokes are part of me, darkness and harmony

My voice within the lies, this is where I post from (ah)

Open world is something that doesnt work on film or book,its a computer thing, bc it is mainly for soloplay. And most reviews Ive checked out on Vantage say its best with 1-2.Nothing wrong with that, I just think,"Open World" and "a lot to read" are not things I believe are oprimal in bgames
Anyway

The second movie also leaned very heavy into the "hypnosis"-thing that you could explain everything with it and I wondered why they bothered with anything except just use hypnosis to get what they want.
The 1st had at least some trickery inspired by real tricks.

Thank you!

thats very bohemian of xou!

I know this is a joke, but quickly tangent here: Those age ranges were most common before (probably) 2000. They were heavily discussed, especially if it was 8- to 88 and then the question "Cant 89 year olds not play this?" came up. So for a short time some publishers used "8-108"

Oh I did. Sounds interesting. First thought its a bit of a cross between Pickomino and Old Maid, but the card backs giving clues seems to change things. Definitly unique!