@Koholos It is worth considering that those "warhammer dorks" buy those games for the miniatures and wouldn't buy the games if they didn't have them. So saying smaller games suffer because of this may be a bit of an questionable statement. Kickstarter attracted the plastic geeks because it is an easy way to mass produce plastic without risking losing the investment companies put in and naturally this attracts people that want them. Maybe its more like companies are finding the propper distrubution platforms for their items, rather then plastic pushing everything off kickstarter? I'll admit I am one of those warhammer nerds and over the years I got a decent collection, so maybe I am a bit biased. But I genuinly think this is more like an the evolution of the market rather then plastic pushing everything out.
There seem to be a lot of over-reactions to my comments in this video, and it seems like people are quite upset about us taking a moment to discuss the contents of the box, and what you're faced with immediately upon opening it. The offence being taken here definitely isn't coming from us, though: the reactions seem far more offended, by a wide margin. The idea that this stuff is "offensive" is really just a straw man - we never said that, we said it was embarrassing. There's nothing puritanical or prudish about it, it's very much about representation - not the mere inclusion of breasts within the game. The human form is wonderful! But let's be honest - this is ridiculous? Athena's armour is a continuation of the classic bikini-chainmail trope, with her clothes giving her support from the... top of her chest?! We're looking at industrial-tier tit-tape here, and this design is in the same vein as comic book characters contorting themselves so you can full see both bums and boobs: it's not actually about celebrating the female form, it's about inventing a fictionalised version of it. And yeah, we see this across all forms of media - but that doesn't mean it isn't a bit crap? It's interesting and a little bit sad that people think we're offended, or against things that are sexy: I just personally don't find such blatant objectification of women to be attractive, and find that those who frequently do honestly don't tend to be the best at treating women like people. Again - it's understandable that many in the hobby may see this as being divisive - and feel like we're unduly pushing people away by suggesting that their love or indifference towards this stuff is Wrong, but as a counter-point I'd actively argue that the inclusion of these crappy tropes has been invisibly divisive for decades, cementing the culture that can tend to make women feel unwelcome. And yes! Everyone has That One Friend Who Is A Woman And Doesn't Mind, but that doesn't mean this stuff isn't silently pushing away all sorts of other people who otherwise might be really into playing games. It's embarassing in 2019 to still want games to just be a boy's club - offence doesn't come into it in any fashion, it's just cringeworthy, and cringeworthy that people still defend it. If people were honestly just open and comfortable with the idea of sexualised content within games, how come we don't have so many comments agreeing with me that Hellas should have rightfully featured loads of absolutely juicy gentlement bums? No one seems to be arguing for that? And no - buff muscled men are not an equivalent: it's just another flavour of vanilla male fantasy. Finally, it is understandable that people may feel bored of us mentioning such things in our videos - but mentions are all that these things are, and we only need to keep bringing this stuff up because the industry keeps being mildly embarrassing. When there's nothing that needs mentioning, we don't mention it. In an ideal world, we'd just "focus on the game". But consider these two points, if you will: It's natural that in a market of often similar games, we're likely to repeat similar criticisms or bring up similar topics during reviews. We aim to entertain despite repitition, and I think it's fair to say that the same is true here. I'd ask people to question whether it's truly repitition that's the issue here, and not the fact that we're shining a light on something that makes people feel uncomfortable. Secondly, and most importantly - board games are just Fun Machines that function via people, and an important part of that is how the people you're playing the game with you feel: to dismiss the social context of what's inside the box of a game as being of no impact to how the game plays is, at best, an misguided statement. Most of us don't consider this social context to be relevant because it's never had an impact on our enjoyment of a game - but rather than dismissing it as an irrelevance, maybe ask yourself why that might be? Anyway that's my addendum, cheers for reading - and if you do take the time to have a think, thank you! Matt
Well said. Boardgaming is becoming a grown up hobby, and it doesn't hurt the game to have more grown up depictions of women. Porn is free on the internet if you need it. I wanted to bring AW realms other game Nemesis to our gaming group, but I'm having second thoughts, since the way some of the female characters are depicted is a bit embarrasing.
Glad you guys have started more directly recommending alternatives to games you think aren't quite there. I know you've done it before but it's nice to see an actual dedicated part at the end of the video for it.
@@torchiest What is "mature" about having gratuitous sculpts/images on display or on the table? Absolutely nothing. Having standards and limits and observing modesty is something that should be praised *not* mocked.
I also listened to your podcast comments on LoH and am (possibly) embarrassed to say that my game group has played this game twice and both times, the end game was triggered by building monuments. I know, I know, everyone I’ve reported this to tells me we must be freaks, no one ever ends the game with monuments. Just wanted to throw this out there, you know, for research purposes. It does happen. Great video, as always. Love your work.
Out of 8 plays we have had 2 moument ends, 4 times it was two regions, 1 temple and 1 monster ending. What i love about loh (which i dont own) is the tug of war over which victory condition wins the game. Not all initial set ups even result in two monsters so im confused how matts group think monsters are the main way to win
Thanks for reviewing this! I always appreciate* your reviews (like this and the Root review) where you say you like a thing and it's fun but still point out flaws with the design or issues you experienced while playing. Nuanced reviews are always more interesting than just "OMG BEST GAME EVER". And that's coming from somebody that owns both LoH and Root lol - keep up the great work Matt and Quinns! *originally said "find" and didn't make sense - edit for clarity!
I don't think I've played a game yet where someone won by defeating a monster. We've always had more fun with the territory control. What bits of it you like probably comes down to your personality. And that's one of the aspects I like about it - there's so many different ways to win that you cannot block all of them, and there's always a way for any player to pull out a surprise win by jumping on the one path the other players have neglected.
This is one of the first reviews I'll disagree with. I've played it 5 times now and the games ended with 2 monster wins, 1 region control, 1 temple control, and 1 monument control. But during those each player was working towards their own victory goal so it was a push/pull. One person was trying to kill their last monster so everyone built a monument to later try and get the monster away from that player. During that also a monument was fully built so there were only 3 rounds left. It has felt different every time. So if you like area control games then give it a shot but my group has loved it each time.
His criticism wasn't that killing monsters was unbalanced, but that it was more enjoyable than doing any of the other things. People gravitated towards killing monsters to win because that was FUNNER than taking territory or building monuments, not because it was STRONGER.
@@TimeSpaceWormsNow the problem I find with his statement though was more more objective than subjective. When I play the game it isn't fun to hunt monsters. I have fun sneaking around and trying to take territories and if necessary get into a battle. Plus I can fight someone that is trying to hunt monsters forcing them to use their combat cards against them. So that's why I don't agree with the review because the multiple win conditions is what makes the game fun for me and the group I play with.
@@TimeSpaceWormsNow I actually agree with this. When I play this game I kinda want to slay the monsters. It might not be the most prudent to go for at times, but I really really want to do it and then you can't, because you have to do other things with your hero :P. A friend of mine likes that game for one thing only. He can aim to slay monsters. Honestly at that price point I expected more :P.
If I had one criticism of the review it would that you didn't explain what a player does on their turn. Great explanation of the overarching victory conditions and mechanics but nothing on actions and the like. Otherwise, great review and disappointed another mini game falls to the kickstarter buzz train. Might add this to the play before buy pile.
@@felipenevado but one thing I like about SUSD is how they integrate a rough overview of how to play within their reviews. See Great Western Trails or even Matt's last review, Silk. While it wasn't a comprehensive "how to" it gave me enough of an idea how it played to judge if I would enjoy the game.
Who cares mate, there are so many great games out there why bother trying to have fun with so much plastic and shit on the board only to get furious when you realise you are missing addons that cannot be purchased anymore. Dont worry, i m sure there will be a second edition in a few years to milk for some more bucks.
@@GeorgiosD90 I'm not angry at the game for it's mediocrity. This review did give some reassurance that its not what I'm looking for but I wish I had come to my conclusion with a rules overview rather than relying on Matt's judgement.
@@666caveman Let me ask you this. If there was an epic awesome legendary original mechanic hidden behind the shady business model, the unbelievable price, the addons bullshit and all that plastic, do you think this channel would have not emphasized it?
I actually love lord of hellas as people in my group also tend to like more aggressive style games, they didnt like scythe much, it fits well for me although I just got it resently and havent played a whole lot yet. But to me is a really good game so far I actually also purchased a kickstarter edition from someone to get some of that extra stuff (which I agree some is unnecessary) but is still good to have more choices especially when if you buy them separately its gonna cost more.
I don't mind kickstarter. It gave me Gloomhaven, Anachrony, the 7th Continent.. and since I don't feel the need to get everything, I can keep my pledge levels manageable. I'm a happy girl.
Is Anachrony similar to Lords of Hellas in that you're paying $100+ for a "good game". I want to own it but paying $100 for a "euro" game which isn't extremely good seems a waste of money. I've blown $140+ on scythe but that is a very memorable great game.
@@garylangford6755 What makes you believe it isn't good? I prefer Anachrony over Scythe to be honest and although I like both, I'd take the former any day of the week. There are just so many cool choices to make and I love the time-traveling aspect. Plus, although Anachrony is a €67 game, the box comes with several extra modules that really up the replayability. The mini's are nice, but also ridiculous bling. You don't need to buy them: The core game comes with tokens to represent the exosuits.
Oh, and to give you an idea: I don't particularly care for games like Lords of Hellas, and CMON kickstarter entries. Not because of the plastic (if I love a game, I like to bling it out), but because they are usually quite dice heavy. I prefer my games to be a little less lucky.
@@garylangford6755 I thought Shut up and Sit down did a review about this game long time ago, but it seemed to have vanished. Maybe it was just a pleasant dream.
I think it’s just a safety net for any extremely sensitive people who find sexism, racism and homophobia in everything they look at. At least I hope it is, because they both seem to over inflate issues that really are no more stereotypical than the majorities imagination. Games are not always about realism they are about fiction and fantasy. Most people have stereotypes but not all stereotypes are bad, they are there for association and to appeal to the majority, who are not insensitive, they’re just sensibly human.
I see it more like... do the few tit flashes transcend the demographic of the game and contribute significantly to the aesthetics? In this case, Athena looks both boring (bland silhouette, oddly serious) and silly (boob window & panties). It's not nearly as over the top as Warhammer. It's half-hearted. Do the designs attached to big boobs always have to be so noticeably boring and lifeless, stand so separate from the designs of male characters? Why not make the entire cast of statuettes a techno-Greek burlesque if you wanna go full tacky and horny? Why not exaggerate silhouettes with impossible fashions and anatomy to give full fantasy? Or something grounded, fashionable, believable? etc. At this low taste level, it's less of a believable manifestation within the game's world than the creators being unable to invest in a game's theme before needing a break to anoint their little bishop in a turtleneck.
So I'd been meaning to mention this for awhile - I stayed away from Root for ages from SUSD's opinion, but I eventually took the plunge and had (still having) a spectacular time. For me, the game works because my groups, I think, aren't as competitive as Quinns' and Matt's, and therefore the joy lies, yes, in figuring out the systems, but also just in being in that world and seeing what strategies develop from the various character combinations and players. I've seen victories that really do feel earned, and never much sympathized with their notion that the game was arbitrary or uninteresting at its core. This is all to say, I'm not entirely sure what the end analogies are implying here (especially as regards my group's taste). This game doesn't look like it has any of the appeal of Root artistically or even mechanically. And all he's saying is that the expansions aren't good either? Or am I missing something (that may not be relevant to my group)~ Also that crossbow just slayed me - good lord we need more of that... cross-over humor ;)
For as much as I love SU&SD and their exemplary content, I generally don't agree with their opinions whatsoever and look for completely different things in my games. That being said, if I see them, I click. They're entertaining as hell. :)
I think it's important for everyone who watches SUSD reviews to know that, just because they don't recommend something, doesn't necessarily mean it's not a good game or that you in particular wont like it, all it means is that they can't recommend it for a general audience. What's important is their description of the game and how it feels makes you feel. One thing that was telling to me in the Root review was Quinns talking about how he turned into an anal school teacher, trying to keep all the other players on the ball, and he admitted that maybe that's not how he should play the game, but then it wouldn't be fun for him.
@@IslanKleinknecht Absolutely! I also find that they tend to put much more value in emergent storytelling in a game, or social interaction within the game than I do. I absolutely love sitting with my friends and joking around and having a good time, but that's outside of the game we're playing. I hope that made sense.
I don't buy a game based directly on their recommendation; it's a secondary factor to whether the game strikes me as interesting before that. I bought Trains, String Railway and Railroad Ink, even though I don't think they recommended two those games, because the way they described the games sounded like it would be fun for me and the sort of people I play with. ...Also because I like trains about as much as the I Like Trains Kid. It's why reducing a game down to a SUSD recommendation or a BGG score doesn't tell the whole story.
Lords of Hellas is the 2 hours version of Runewars, which if you haven't played you're missing out on life, go play it! I really like Lords of Hellas after my first play, it's better then Kemet or Cyclades, I do like Inis better though. It has some good ideas and some just ok ones.
Hello congratulations for the video, I have a question .... Artifacts, (as reported on the action summary card), can only be used in the "REGULAR ACTIONS" phase, but there are some artifacts that have their effect during a Hunt ......... so? Can they be used when the text requires it or what?
You know, just the other day I was talking with some friends about board game design, and we brought up the topic of games that have a grab bag of cool mechanics but then...only one or two even matters. And how easy it is to fall into that pitfall if you're throwing mechanics together recklessly. This game sounds like it's a good example of that problem. It sounds like it has some really fun ideas, but that half of them should have been excised and put into a different game where they could be the focus, instead of being a sideshow hardly anyone engages with.
I loved this video, and find myself (somewhat reluctantly) agreeing with many of your observations about LoH's deficits. Our group recognizes that slaying monsters is 1] the most efficient way to win and 2] the most fun. And although that strategy is actively thwarted by the other players, the resultant gameplay risks becoming multiple turns where everyone else watches the active player "solve" the "combat card conundrum". A hero with strength 3 seems to be a sweet spot granting a reasonable CC pool to fell weaker monsters in almost one swoop or gain an artifact/priest after a deliberate withdrawal with minimal wounds. Since CCs are a function of hero strength, the Zeus monument is almost always completed while only one or two levels are added to the others. The combat card system is one of the game's strengths, and it is a pleasant "game within a game" experience. The game should have included more female heroes, but Helena, Casandra & Cleito (the last two only available through the expansions) all offer different abilities (and IMHO are not hyper-sexualized like the Athena monument which may be the only questionable choice regarding artwork assets). I'm bummed that for all the things you can do with heroes, there isn't a mechanism where they battle each other. The absence of a "clash of the titans" mode in a sci-fi version of Ancient Greece strikes me as an odd choice. The quests themselves can be hit or miss because some artifacts are more useful than others, and there's always an opportunity cost to removing your hero from the board to pursue a quest when they could be hunting monsters. Having said that, our group has achieved the full spectrum of win conditions (with Monster Slayer being ~50% of the time). There are some things about LoH that work well, and other portions that don't quite mesh together (quests and hunting present a illusory option in that the latter is decidedly more productive than the former). So I ask myself- if LoH just contained only cardboard standees versus (really nice) plastic models, would I have backed it? Probably not (this decision would have been dependent on the hypothetical price of an all-cardboard version of the game). The biggest point I took away from your video is acknowledging how KS culture (not Kickstarter as a business model) creates an environment for self-delusion that is strongly influenced by the lack of complete information awareness, FOMO and an individual's susceptibility to "hype". And yet, other highly successful and hyped campaigns have validated themselves with the delivery of strong and interesting gameplay (Blood Rage and Rising Sun) decorated with extraneous plastic minis that support the thematic immersion and provide a pleasing physical interface with the game experience. I would really be interested to watch you and Quinns do a video on this topic. LoH is the "little engine that almost could". As for myself, it remains a fun game in spite of its flaws. [BTW, I don't understand why someone would downvote an insightful analysis that discusses strengths and weaknesses of a game. But fanbois are gonna fanboi, I guess...]
I see a lot of people taking issue with SU&SD's overly PC attitude, and I can for one say I am glad they take these issues up. I bought this game, not knowing what it was, and unpacked it in front of my in-laws who are minotaurs. Long story short, they left immediately after seeing the racist and unrealistic depictions of minotaurs in this game. My marriage is now in shambles. If I had seen this review, that would never have happened!
As a backer I do object a bit to The bit about expansions being done in a vacuum. The game was out for several months while they redid part of the expansions.
Is several months enough? I have bought kickstarters but tend to go for the smaller cheaper ones, with the big expensive boxes there is a lot of pressure to get it out quickly and expand quickly before the next one comes along. Waiting a year or more for expansions to traditional published games gives more time to get feedback and adjust the game and tighten the experience, unfortunately that may not be an option for big Kickstarter games. And there does seem to be a need for big is better, and it sometimes is but often it feels a bit messy.
"Pair of unrealistic boobs" Living in Brazil I really feel bad for the British. That´s the kind of thing that make a kingdom go round the world colonizing the shit out of it.
the only problem i see with your reviews, in general, is that you find ONE point you don't like and overextend on it. but (no pun) the " But, and it's a huge but from a frankly skinny man" was excellent ,)
Thank you so much for making this review! Earlier in the year, when Tainted Grail kickstarter was live, I was so tempted and stressed about getting EVERYTHING in the kickstarter so I wouldn't miss out. You make a good point about planning all these expansions before the game is even out, its basically just "more". I don't really need any of these "extras" for the game, b/c thats not why I play games.
My initial thoughts made me want to angrily tear in the areas of gameplay that I feel like you were wrong. But then I realised that I just felt sorry for you, that the group you have played with haven't managed to get the same experience from the game that I have. I believe that this game has much more to offer than you got out of it.
Honestly the kickstarter exclusive amount isn't as bad as I always expect, plus it's only some "exclusive" expansions. So good on them but still had the exclusive heavy kickstarter market we are in.
@@elijahmeilak2906 haha, man I wrote that comment two years ago, so I'm not entirely sure. But I think what I meant is that the cover art makes it look like a cool mech battle game and it's actually a pretty involved euro-game.
@@josephboyne9327 I just bought Scythe recently and it quickly became my favourite board game of all time. It’s everything I wanted in a game. Different strokes for different folks, I suppose. :)
@@luiscarlosqg British "quite" is medium, American "quite" is very. So if you say something is "quite good," it can mean it's either just fine or it's excellent.
It's interesting seeing this review and the comment section, because my game group always builds the hell out of the monuments. We've actually never had someone win from combat lol. Someone came close once though.
Have you guys considered doing a zombicide review? Another box of plastic but with the 2nd edition currently active on Kickstarter, I'd be curious on your thoughts for the game.
Oh gawd, rewatching this, I forgot about the Mary Whitehouse reference. She's at least part of the reason we lost the awesome Hinchcliffe years in Doctor Who too early!
I got a copy a few months ago and was horrified at how crap the god's bases are. Crap...the towers...lean in to each other and cannot be heated to stand straight. Also, the sundrop...wow...like someone half sprayed the minis and then wiped them on their ass. Love the game but the minis suck.
Does anyone else finds some aspects of this review a tiny bit... misogynistic? What I got from the early part of the review is that what looks like a C to D cup pair of breasts are called, "unrealistic" (something I find bizarre coming from a family of mostly large breasted women) and then discomfort is expressed with having them being exposed at all. Which, as a LGBTQ+ person, I could sort of understand if a sort of joke is being made on not being sexually attracted to women that it makes one disgusted, or something but I don't know. I'm just here trying to defend SU&SD since I actually like them. But to me it borderlines on immaturity, insecurity, and implies that there's something wrong with exposed breasts, when we have to constantly fight for our right to be able to not breast freed in public but also not being called a slut if we want to freely display our attributes. I don't know, it rubbed me the wrong way. Sorry.
I felt the exact same way. Also, there is exactly *one* miniature in the game that is revealing at all and making an outraged rant about it so central to the review was just odd to me. Don't really see why a female character can't be both sexy & badass either.
While I do love me some Mythic Battles, I always feel it takes longer to set up and explain than it does to play. That coupled with the ENORMOUS shelf space it takes up kinda turns me off to it. Also I don't know if you've ever played Wildlands by Martin Wallace but it's basically the same skirmish type game for MUCH cheaper and has a way shorter setup time and simpler rules.
Ok I own this game I haven’t played it yet. And I can’t get behind the reviews at all exceptionalities for Scythe. They say Xia is not worth it I love that game. Terraforming Mars is mediocre (That is my favorite game I have and the first game I played during leave). They say Cyclades is good (w/ Titans) I think it is ok, fair at best. And they recommend Star Wars Imperial Assault. That game is horrible to set up, take down, and teach every little thing. I just think this game should be given a shot, most people like it. Not as bad as Rising Sun but probably not defined as Kemet. I don’t think Blood Rage had enough variety so I picked up this game. I do agree that some expansions can make or break a game. Mars Colonies is good but Dino Islands Totally liquid is plain awful. I don’t think most people should base their decisions on buying a game on this review. You should base it on whether it interests you, is it a notable company, and how does it play. I do agree though I would buy Inis before LoH.
Fair review I enjoyed it very much, thank you! I wonder what SUSD thinks about Meeple War which I own and keep on playing but still not sure how I feel about it. It also seems to be more fun to learn than play like Root and it is just as well as Lords of not what it looks (being an almost chess-like brutal strategy game while looking like a family cookie).
Love you guys, but I'm curious what the justification for the dislike of the female body is? Not sure I've seen you guys complain about shirtless men in games?
@@micshazam842 I'm not sure how an aesthetic can be immature. I think how one views sexuality frames how they perceive art such as this. Is the venus de milo immature? I'm not in love with the aesthetic personally but I see no social harm done by it.
I like their reviews but I have to say that their complaining about how the women are dressed is getting a bit tiresome to me. If it bugs them that much though then it's fair for them to mention it, but I think its a bit puritanical at this point. I cant help but think some of this is cyclical too. In a few years boobs might be empowering again, who knows.
Its because the ladies in the game are clearly sexualised and over caricatured in a way that feels a bit macho and would make it hard to get a female player to engage with it
@@MattCrawley_Music I suppose that's all perspective though. I'm not saying it's wrong but assuming what women will like or will not seems the more demeaning act. Some women enjoy style of fantasy with scantily clad men and women.
@Golden Griffon I think that's a bit much. Slavery and sexuality are hardly in the same universe. And its very only sexual as the audience feels it is, is the female body inherently an object of sexuality? Is exposed skin?
Very interesting review, and as ive read many people mention that monsters are the easiest way to win. But in all our games of lords of hellas that we have played the monster winning condition is the only one that still to this day hasnt happened. And I have tried it without succes. Which makes me think that the game maybe takes the shape of the gaming group, since it has variable winning condition. I guess I have a very agressive group here :D Great review as usual!
I’m not sure you’ve played this properly or enough. Our experience with this game has been incredibly diverse and the monuments have been built many times. Strange.
Great review!! the only thing that could have made it better would be if you´d pulled out an encyclopedia along with the nail clippers, like in your arkham review. I was so ready for a joke that never came.
If you want lots of plastic on the board and you want to have fun too....... Project: Elite....... the remade version. The minis look way better than they used to.
@Golden Griffon - Some women have large breasts, that's natural (are those women to be shamed & shunned?). Mentioning that aspect of the art in the review with an eyeroll is understandable, but his tone of, "I hate that, and if you like it, then I don't like you, either," is hypocritical & childish. Bending over backwards to virtue-signal like this is more cringey & offensive than big boobs in game art.
@@ModernPlague you're clearly taking the piss, mate. Yes some women have big boobs. But every fucking time a woman appears in a game, shes got back problems for days, doesnt know what chcolate is and is wearing almost nothing. Its not really what women look like. And yes, there are lots of guys in this too, who look super ripped. But there are guys who arent too. Plus, as far as the "that went really quick" Do you play as the woman. Do you play as the man. If yes to both, then the depiction is ok, if very tasteless. If you only play as the man, then its a problem, becuase its not "power fantasy" for the woman, its just treating them like a sex object.
Thanks for reviewing this! It's surprising to hear your experience with the monster hunts. Our group played it twice. First 2 times someone tried to hunt a monster they failed and another player went and slayed the half wounded monster easily. Then players learned not to even try. Next game only the new players that didn't play before went hunting, failed, and no one ever tried again. You can generally ignore the monsters on the board. They don't do much harm, and they definitely weren't the centre of anyone strategy. Instead, we all sent the heroes to quests, mainly to get the tokens that give you an extra usurp (or something like that, don't remember exactly), and concentrated on area control / temples. I agree completely with your comments about the monuments. Building them is kind of a null turn. Someone will eventually have to do it but you really don't want to be the one that loses their turn. Also, thanks for comparing it to kemet and inis. Never played kemet but I really love inis! Maybe my 1st game ATM. Yes, they are similar! But I would say that most of the things that lord of hellas adds just make it less fun. For me lords of hellas feels like a overly complex / convoluted inis that plays in 2:30-3 hours instead of 30-60 minutes. Don't see myself play it again. Thanks again for the interesting review. Keep up with the great work!
Tom Gurion Kemet is better. Course, I think Kemet is just about the best dudes-on-a-map scuffle game there is (and I have a fair amount of them including Cry Havoc, Scythe, Blood Rage, Nexus Ops, etc.). There is a lot of this “chasing the newest shiney” going around when tried and true games like Kemet just can’t be beat. Any time you play a game and you’re like, “oh, this is like X” then it’s probably a safe bet that you should have stuck with X then. Ha! At least, that’s what I’m learning. For the most part I’ve given up on buying new games and am playing the ones I’ve had for a while again. Best decision ever.
Except building a monument is how you get priests back in your pool other than building a temple and that becomes increasingly difficult as the game goes on. Generally agree with the review and I quite like LoH though Kemet is a great game and better when you want a pure Area Control experience.
So the game is not good cause of plastic?? What kind of review is that. The other 5 reviews I saw they say it's a fantastic game so i will definitely check it out.
As someone who would love to own Nemesis but probably won’t because I don’t have a boat of cash to part with, I hope they don’t review it. Now if it came to retail...
I love your channel and your reviews. You guys are a major reason why I went from 10 board games to close to 30. However, why are you guys okay with having scantily-clad men (Conan), but then virtue signal and act like puritanical churchgoers when it comes to women?
Well, for one the context of depictions of women vs men in media and games is very different, and has very different history. Conan is not depicted half naked to serve as any kind of fan service, while women often are. Secondly, Conan is a well established character with a known look (much like a superhero), and that look is loincloth+sword. Athena is also a well established godess, of warfare and wisdom. She is most often depicted in full hoplite armor, with an owl, not in a bra. So the context is different. If Conan was depicted posing in a string thong and his privates trurst forward in a very non-Conan way, the comparison would be more apt. The statue is just tacky and detracts from the otherwise excellent theme, like a nice living room with a pin-up calender as a center pieve. There is no virtue signaling in Matt saying that he finds it tacky and off-putting, it is a part of the art design of the game as much as everything else.
Perhaps because scantily-clad men have not typically been seen as being subjective reflections of sexism as much as scantily-clad women. (Not to mention it is no doubt much easier to highlight boobs and "get away with it" than it is to highlight a man's bulge...).
Matt is absolutely entitled to his opinion. I don't contest that. Also, I hear what you're all saying and I don't disagree. But, if you look at minute 12 there is a scantily clad male creature and a scantily-clad female creature. That is, in and of itself, equality. Also, men are being depicted in things like WWE to be sexy to women. Are you honestly going to say that women don't objectify men and that they don't find these shirtless dudes attractive?
MicShazam but there certainly are media where men are presented in a certain way to be sexually appealing to the women consuming that media - surely you’d agree with that? And do you have an issue with that as well?
So it is decent but not great. My group played the game and liked it, but all agreed that the game should always be played with 4 monuments as it greatly improves the game.
The word robot comes from the Czech word for slave or to be in servitude. As a clone who went into his "father's" profession and then took jobs at the behest of the empire. Robot is quite a good description. Boba Fett didn't really have much agency in his life
Hi, the base game has cardboard standees only for the temples. The cities are artwork printed on the board. There are plastic minis for soldiers, heroes, monsters and monuments. The terrain expansion gives plastic cities and temples that really stand out on the board, making them easier to spot and way prettier.
Expensions were developed after the base game was shipped to backers and were heavily influenced by feedback from players (there were dev diaries explaining all kinds of changes) In my group we only occasionally hunt monsters - and mostly to get priests I feel like you've skipped the explanaition of one of the core mechanics in the game - the different action selections Other than that great video :)
I've only played once and I won by controlling temples. The layout had most of the monsters by 2 players who didn't want to give the other an easier kill. I wouldn't say the other part of the game is like a spreadsheet exactly, but I get Matt's point. I liked all the aspects and possible win conditions. I refer to this game as Blood Rage's drunk, crazy uncle.
Totally different subject but is it possible for you to do a Captain sonar gameplay with the two expansions “upgrade one” and “operation dragon” please 🙏🏻
Is anyone else constantly relieved when the review says the game isn't that great? I live in dread of seeing an awesome game in the next review and having to buy it.
I don't think boob armour is stopping people playing games cuz half my friends are female and they couldn't care, but my main point is that I think that less people know of the existance of these games, we need more varied games getting into more high street shops. Im fed up of whenever I mention that Im into board and card games people mention cluedo and monopoly. I just don't think people know they exist.
"Right from the start of the game it's just a rush for everyone to get points to try and win the game." So...a board game? "You're taking things or doing things to try and win or you're taking things and doing things to try and deny someone else." So...like a lot of many's favorite board games? Lol
'Its fine. Its just a bit embarassing and I don't want it on my kitchen table. And if you do, that's fine, but I probably don't want you on my kitchen table either.' Is that why Quinn isn't in the review? heha. But joking aside, I completely agree with your comparison with Root, fun game that just ends and not in a satisfying way. This game looks like the same deal. The doing is fun, the ending is not.
I like the theme. But it sounds like if falls a bit short in satisfying the craving for an Area control war game. Needs a cyborg Xena warrior battle angel. Vagabond.
Plastic Investment Site is a great way to describe Kickstarter.
It also sounds like it could be a card from Netrunner (RIP)
@Koholos It is worth considering that those "warhammer dorks" buy those games for the miniatures and wouldn't buy the games if they didn't have them. So saying smaller games suffer because of this may be a bit of an questionable statement. Kickstarter attracted the plastic geeks because it is an easy way to mass produce plastic without risking losing the investment companies put in and naturally this attracts people that want them.
Maybe its more like companies are finding the propper distrubution platforms for their items, rather then plastic pushing everything off kickstarter?
I'll admit I am one of those warhammer nerds and over the years I got a decent collection, so maybe I am a bit biased. But I genuinly think this is more like an the evolution of the market rather then plastic pushing everything out.
Gotta love that sheriff of Nottingham crossbow. Truly the best bluff
Made me chuckle
Honestly I stared at the crossbow, not knowing why it looked different, in puzzlement for longer than I needed to. xD
i realize it is kinda off topic but does anybody know of a good site to stream new movies online ?
@Gus Ulises Flixportal :D
@Deangelo Kendall thanks, signed up and it seems like they got a lot of movies there :) Appreciate it!
There seem to be a lot of over-reactions to my comments in this video, and it seems like people are quite upset about us taking a moment to discuss the contents of the box, and what you're faced with immediately upon opening it.
The offence being taken here definitely isn't coming from us, though: the reactions seem far more offended, by a wide margin. The idea that this stuff is "offensive" is really just a straw man - we never said that, we said it was embarrassing. There's nothing puritanical or prudish about it, it's very much about representation - not the mere inclusion of breasts within the game.
The human form is wonderful! But let's be honest - this is ridiculous? Athena's armour is a continuation of the classic bikini-chainmail trope, with her clothes giving her support from the... top of her chest?! We're looking at industrial-tier tit-tape here, and this design is in the same vein as comic book characters contorting themselves so you can full see both bums and boobs: it's not actually about celebrating the female form, it's about inventing a fictionalised version of it. And yeah, we see this across all forms of media - but that doesn't mean it isn't a bit crap?
It's interesting and a little bit sad that people think we're offended, or against things that are sexy: I just personally don't find such blatant objectification of women to be attractive, and find that those who frequently do honestly don't tend to be the best at treating women like people.
Again - it's understandable that many in the hobby may see this as being divisive - and feel like we're unduly pushing people away by suggesting that their love or indifference towards this stuff is Wrong, but as a counter-point I'd actively argue that the inclusion of these crappy tropes has been invisibly divisive for decades, cementing the culture that can tend to make women feel unwelcome. And yes! Everyone has That One Friend Who Is A Woman And Doesn't Mind, but that doesn't mean this stuff isn't silently pushing away all sorts of other people who otherwise might be really into playing games. It's embarassing in 2019 to still want games to just be a boy's club - offence doesn't come into it in any fashion, it's just cringeworthy, and cringeworthy that people still defend it.
If people were honestly just open and comfortable with the idea of sexualised content within games, how come we don't have so many comments agreeing with me that Hellas should have rightfully featured loads of absolutely juicy gentlement bums? No one seems to be arguing for that? And no - buff muscled men are not an equivalent: it's just another flavour of vanilla male fantasy.
Finally, it is understandable that people may feel bored of us mentioning such things in our videos - but mentions are all that these things are, and we only need to keep bringing this stuff up because the industry keeps being mildly embarrassing. When there's nothing that needs mentioning, we don't mention it.
In an ideal world, we'd just "focus on the game". But consider these two points, if you will:
It's natural that in a market of often similar games, we're likely to repeat similar criticisms or bring up similar topics during reviews. We aim to entertain despite repitition, and I think it's fair to say that the same is true here. I'd ask people to question whether it's truly repitition that's the issue here, and not the fact that we're shining a light on something that makes people feel uncomfortable.
Secondly, and most importantly - board games are just Fun Machines that function via people, and an important part of that is how the people you're playing the game with you feel: to dismiss the social context of what's inside the box of a game as being of no impact to how the game plays is, at best, an misguided statement. Most of us don't consider this social context to be relevant because it's never had an impact on our enjoyment of a game - but rather than dismissing it as an irrelevance, maybe ask yourself why that might be?
Anyway that's my addendum, cheers for reading - and if you do take the time to have a think, thank you!
Matt
Shut Up & Sit Down I feel like this wall of text has multiple crits
Well said. Boardgaming is becoming a grown up hobby, and it doesn't hurt the game to have more grown up depictions of women. Porn is free on the internet if you need it.
I wanted to bring AW realms other game Nemesis to our gaming group, but I'm having second thoughts, since the way some of the female characters are depicted is a bit embarrasing.
Yes! Well said, Matt.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts, keep up the good work!
Spot on
Glad you guys have started more directly recommending alternatives to games you think aren't quite there. I know you've done it before but it's nice to see an actual dedicated part at the end of the video for it.
The official review. "Where is all the gay stuff at?"
@@watwat3682 indeed. What exactly is "mature" about being embarrassed by breasts?
@@torchiest What is "mature" about having gratuitous sculpts/images on display or on the table? Absolutely nothing. Having standards and limits and observing modesty is something that should be praised *not* mocked.
I also listened to your podcast comments on LoH and am (possibly) embarrassed to say that my game group has played this game twice and both times, the end game was triggered by building monuments. I know, I know, everyone I’ve reported this to tells me we must be freaks, no one ever ends the game with monuments. Just wanted to throw this out there, you know, for research purposes. It does happen. Great video, as always. Love your work.
Yes this frequently happens. It sounds like Matt’s group has some groupthink going on 🤷♂️
Out of 8 plays we have had 2 moument ends, 4 times it was two regions, 1 temple and 1 monster ending. What i love about loh (which i dont own) is the tug of war over which victory condition wins the game. Not all initial set ups even result in two monsters so im confused how matts group think monsters are the main way to win
Thanks for reviewing this! I always appreciate* your reviews (like this and the Root review) where you say you like a thing and it's fun but still point out flaws with the design or issues you experienced while playing. Nuanced reviews are always more interesting than just "OMG BEST GAME EVER". And that's coming from somebody that owns both LoH and Root lol - keep up the great work Matt and Quinns!
*originally said "find" and didn't make sense - edit for clarity!
I don't think I've played a game yet where someone won by defeating a monster. We've always had more fun with the territory control. What bits of it you like probably comes down to your personality. And that's one of the aspects I like about it - there's so many different ways to win that you cannot block all of them, and there's always a way for any player to pull out a surprise win by jumping on the one path the other players have neglected.
Well I don't want to be on your kitchen table, Matt. So there.
*goes and has a little cry*
Im confused. Is there something wrong about sexy woman? Im maybe old and dont get it.
Petition for the 'Mary Whitehouse Approved' stamp to become a regular feature
Bizarre plastic investment site :D I love it!
This is one of the first reviews I'll disagree with. I've played it 5 times now and the games ended with 2 monster wins, 1 region control, 1 temple control, and 1 monument control. But during those each player was working towards their own victory goal so it was a push/pull. One person was trying to kill their last monster so everyone built a monument to later try and get the monster away from that player. During that also a monument was fully built so there were only 3 rounds left. It has felt different every time. So if you like area control games then give it a shot but my group has loved it each time.
His criticism wasn't that killing monsters was unbalanced, but that it was more enjoyable than doing any of the other things. People gravitated towards killing monsters to win because that was FUNNER than taking territory or building monuments, not because it was STRONGER.
@@TimeSpaceWormsNow the problem I find with his statement though was more more objective than subjective. When I play the game it isn't fun to hunt monsters. I have fun sneaking around and trying to take territories and if necessary get into a battle. Plus I can fight someone that is trying to hunt monsters forcing them to use their combat cards against them. So that's why I don't agree with the review because the multiple win conditions is what makes the game fun for me and the group I play with.
@@TimeSpaceWormsNow I actually agree with this. When I play this game I kinda want to slay the monsters. It might not be the most prudent to go for at times, but I really really want to do it and then you can't, because you have to do other things with your hero :P. A friend of mine likes that game for one thing only. He can aim to slay monsters. Honestly at that price point I expected more :P.
"Surprised us by being 'not bad.'" Ouch.
If I had one criticism of the review it would that you didn't explain what a player does on their turn. Great explanation of the overarching victory conditions and mechanics but nothing on actions and the like. Otherwise, great review and disappointed another mini game falls to the kickstarter buzz train. Might add this to the play before buy pile.
That's a review, not a rules or how to play tho
@@felipenevado but one thing I like about SUSD is how they integrate a rough overview of how to play within their reviews. See Great Western Trails or even Matt's last review, Silk. While it wasn't a comprehensive "how to" it gave me enough of an idea how it played to judge if I would enjoy the game.
Who cares mate, there are so many great games out there why bother trying to have fun with so much plastic and shit on the board only to get furious when you realise you are missing addons that cannot be purchased anymore.
Dont worry, i m sure there will be a second edition in a few years to milk for some more bucks.
@@GeorgiosD90 I'm not angry at the game for it's mediocrity. This review did give some reassurance that its not what I'm looking for but I wish I had come to my conclusion with a rules overview rather than relying on Matt's judgement.
@@666caveman Let me ask you this. If there was an epic awesome legendary original mechanic hidden behind the shady business model, the unbelievable price, the addons bullshit and all that plastic, do you think this channel would have not emphasized it?
I actually love lord of hellas as people in my group also tend to like more aggressive style games, they didnt like scythe much, it fits well for me although I just got it resently and havent played a whole lot yet. But to me is a really good game so far I actually also purchased a kickstarter edition from someone to get some of that extra stuff (which I agree some is unnecessary) but is still good to have more choices especially when if you buy them separately its gonna cost more.
Looking at those plain gray plastic models my first impulse would be to buy some hobby paint.
TFW you're 2 minutes into a video when the notification for it arrives.
I don't mind kickstarter. It gave me Gloomhaven, Anachrony, the 7th Continent.. and since I don't feel the need to get everything, I can keep my pledge levels manageable. I'm a happy girl.
Is Anachrony similar to Lords of Hellas in that you're paying $100+ for a "good game". I want to own it but paying $100 for a "euro" game which isn't extremely good seems a waste of money. I've blown $140+ on scythe but that is a very memorable great game.
@@garylangford6755 What makes you believe it isn't good? I prefer Anachrony over Scythe to be honest and although I like both, I'd take the former any day of the week. There are just so many cool choices to make and I love the time-traveling aspect.
Plus, although Anachrony is a €67 game, the box comes with several extra modules that really up the replayability. The mini's are nice, but also ridiculous bling. You don't need to buy them: The core game comes with tokens to represent the exosuits.
Oh, and to give you an idea: I don't particularly care for games like Lords of Hellas, and CMON kickstarter entries. Not because of the plastic (if I love a game, I like to bling it out), but because they are usually quite dice heavy. I prefer my games to be a little less lucky.
@@freakstylebjdstudios8198 just based on what I hear. Damn I'll consider getting it if there's a good deal second hand
@@garylangford6755 I thought Shut up and Sit down did a review about this game long time ago, but it seemed to have vanished.
Maybe it was just a pleasant dream.
Yeah, I want to play excel spreadsheet.
Are you afraid of boobs or being called sexist for liking them? Every woman I've played this with says Athena looks badass.
I think it’s just a safety net for any extremely sensitive people who find sexism, racism and homophobia in everything they look at.
At least I hope it is, because they both seem to over inflate issues that really are no more stereotypical than the majorities imagination. Games are not always about realism they are about fiction and fantasy. Most people have stereotypes but not all stereotypes are bad, they are there for association and to appeal to the majority, who are not insensitive, they’re just sensibly human.
MicShazam I absolutely love warhammers ridiculously over the top aesthetic
I see it more like... do the few tit flashes transcend the demographic of the game and contribute significantly to the aesthetics?
In this case, Athena looks both boring (bland silhouette, oddly serious) and silly (boob window & panties). It's not nearly as over the top as Warhammer. It's half-hearted.
Do the designs attached to big boobs always have to be so noticeably boring and lifeless, stand so separate from the designs of male characters? Why not make the entire cast of statuettes a techno-Greek burlesque if you wanna go full tacky and horny? Why not exaggerate silhouettes with impossible fashions and anatomy to give full fantasy? Or something grounded, fashionable, believable? etc. At this low taste level, it's less of a believable manifestation within the game's world than the creators being unable to invest in a game's theme before needing a break to anoint their little bishop in a turtleneck.
Omg I spit my coffee at the "Schrödinger's tits" 😅😂
So I'd been meaning to mention this for awhile - I stayed away from Root for ages from SUSD's opinion, but I eventually took the plunge and had (still having) a spectacular time. For me, the game works because my groups, I think, aren't as competitive as Quinns' and Matt's, and therefore the joy lies, yes, in figuring out the systems, but also just in being in that world and seeing what strategies develop from the various character combinations and players. I've seen victories that really do feel earned, and never much sympathized with their notion that the game was arbitrary or uninteresting at its core.
This is all to say, I'm not entirely sure what the end analogies are implying here (especially as regards my group's taste). This game doesn't look like it has any of the appeal of Root artistically or even mechanically. And all he's saying is that the expansions aren't good either? Or am I missing something (that may not be relevant to my group)~
Also that crossbow just slayed me - good lord we need more of that... cross-over humor ;)
For as much as I love SU&SD and their exemplary content, I generally don't agree with their opinions whatsoever and look for completely different things in my games. That being said, if I see them, I click. They're entertaining as hell. :)
I think it's important for everyone who watches SUSD reviews to know that, just because they don't recommend something, doesn't necessarily mean it's not a good game or that you in particular wont like it, all it means is that they can't recommend it for a general audience. What's important is their description of the game and how it feels makes you feel. One thing that was telling to me in the Root review was Quinns talking about how he turned into an anal school teacher, trying to keep all the other players on the ball, and he admitted that maybe that's not how he should play the game, but then it wouldn't be fun for him.
@@IslanKleinknecht Absolutely! I also find that they tend to put much more value in emergent storytelling in a game, or social interaction within the game than I do. I absolutely love sitting with my friends and joking around and having a good time, but that's outside of the game we're playing. I hope that made sense.
I bought so many great based on susd reviews and I'm yet to find a stinker. I also bought root.
I don't buy a game based directly on their recommendation; it's a secondary factor to whether the game strikes me as interesting before that.
I bought Trains, String Railway and Railroad Ink, even though I don't think they recommended two those games, because the way they described the games sounded like it would be fun for me and the sort of people I play with. ...Also because I like trains about as much as the I Like Trains Kid.
It's why reducing a game down to a SUSD recommendation or a BGG score doesn't tell the whole story.
Lords of Hellas is the 2 hours version of Runewars, which if you haven't played you're missing out on life, go play it! I really like Lords of Hellas after my first play, it's better then Kemet or Cyclades, I do like Inis better though. It has some good ideas and some just ok ones.
Lords of Ragnarok will be better than Lords of Hellas ;)
I got a notification that you just uploaded this lmao
Hello congratulations for the video, I have a question .... Artifacts, (as reported on the action summary card), can only be used in the "REGULAR ACTIONS" phase, but there are some artifacts that have their effect during a Hunt ......... so? Can they be used when the text requires it or what?
1:05 "Where are all the hot young men having gay sex... with robots?"
This is often my biggest complaint with products. Not enough robosex.
Forbidden Stars = best dudes on a map.
You know, just the other day I was talking with some friends about board game design, and we brought up the topic of games that have a grab bag of cool mechanics but then...only one or two even matters. And how easy it is to fall into that pitfall if you're throwing mechanics together recklessly. This game sounds like it's a good example of that problem. It sounds like it has some really fun ideas, but that half of them should have been excised and put into a different game where they could be the focus, instead of being a sideshow hardly anyone engages with.
Holy hell that Nottingham's crossbow blew my mind
I loved this video, and find myself (somewhat reluctantly) agreeing with many of your observations about LoH's deficits.
Our group recognizes that slaying monsters is 1] the most efficient way to win and 2] the most fun. And although that strategy is actively thwarted by the other players, the resultant gameplay risks becoming multiple turns where everyone else watches the active player "solve" the "combat card conundrum". A hero with strength 3 seems to be a sweet spot granting a reasonable CC pool to fell weaker monsters in almost one swoop or gain an artifact/priest after a deliberate withdrawal with minimal wounds. Since CCs are a function of hero strength, the Zeus monument is almost always completed while only one or two levels are added to the others. The combat card system is one of the game's strengths, and it is a pleasant "game within a game" experience.
The game should have included more female heroes, but Helena, Casandra & Cleito (the last two only available through the expansions) all offer different abilities (and IMHO are not hyper-sexualized like the Athena monument which may be the only questionable choice regarding artwork assets). I'm bummed that for all the things you can do with heroes, there isn't a mechanism where they battle each other. The absence of a "clash of the titans" mode in a sci-fi version of Ancient Greece strikes me as an odd choice. The quests themselves can be hit or miss because some artifacts are more useful than others, and there's always an opportunity cost to removing your hero from the board to pursue a quest when they could be hunting monsters. Having said that, our group has achieved the full spectrum of win conditions (with Monster Slayer being ~50% of the time).
There are some things about LoH that work well, and other portions that don't quite mesh together (quests and hunting present a illusory option in that the latter is decidedly more productive than the former). So I ask myself- if LoH just contained only cardboard standees versus (really nice) plastic models, would I have backed it?
Probably not (this decision would have been dependent on the hypothetical price of an all-cardboard version of the game).
The biggest point I took away from your video is acknowledging how KS culture (not Kickstarter as a business model) creates an environment for self-delusion that is strongly influenced by the lack of complete information awareness, FOMO and an individual's susceptibility to "hype". And yet, other highly successful and hyped campaigns have validated themselves with the delivery of strong and interesting gameplay (Blood Rage and Rising Sun) decorated with extraneous plastic minis that support the thematic immersion and provide a pleasing physical interface with the game experience. I would really be interested to watch you and Quinns do a video on this topic.
LoH is the "little engine that almost could". As for myself, it remains a fun game in spite of its flaws.
[BTW, I don't understand why someone would downvote an insightful analysis that discusses strengths and weaknesses of a game. But fanbois are gonna fanboi, I guess...]
I see a lot of people taking issue with SU&SD's overly PC attitude, and I can for one say I am glad they take these issues up. I bought this game, not knowing what it was, and unpacked it in front of my in-laws who are minotaurs. Long story short, they left immediately after seeing the racist and unrealistic depictions of minotaurs in this game. My marriage is now in shambles. If I had seen this review, that would never have happened!
No joke, I started the video by jumping to 1:08
:^)
As a backer I do object a bit to The bit about expansions being done in a vacuum. The game was out for several months while they redid part of the expansions.
Is several months enough? I have bought kickstarters but tend to go for the smaller cheaper ones, with the big expensive boxes there is a lot of pressure to get it out quickly and expand quickly before the next one comes along. Waiting a year or more for expansions to traditional published games gives more time to get feedback and adjust the game and tighten the experience, unfortunately that may not be an option for big Kickstarter games. And there does seem to be a need for big is better, and it sometimes is but often it feels a bit messy.
"Pair of unrealistic boobs"
Living in Brazil I really feel bad for the British. That´s the kind of thing that make a kingdom go round the world colonizing the shit out of it.
8:02 why are you smuggling contraband Mattttt?!!?
the only problem i see with your reviews, in general, is that you find ONE point you don't like and overextend on it.
but (no pun) the " But, and it's a huge but from a frankly skinny man" was excellent ,)
Thank you so much for making this review! Earlier in the year, when Tainted Grail kickstarter was live, I was so tempted and stressed about getting EVERYTHING in the kickstarter so I wouldn't miss out. You make a good point about planning all these expansions before the game is even out, its basically just "more". I don't really need any of these "extras" for the game, b/c thats not why I play games.
I enjoy Lords of Hellas a lot!
I see a lot of clips of them playin the game. Are there full videos of the clips?
How long has it been since we've had Mary Whitehouse references in pop culture?
My initial thoughts made me want to angrily tear in the areas of gameplay that I feel like you were wrong.
But then I realised that I just felt sorry for you, that the group you have played with haven't managed to get the same experience from the game that I have. I believe that this game has much more to offer than you got out of it.
Great video. Glad to hear a dissenting opinion. This is my favorite game for almost the exact reasons that you don't care for it much.
Where can I find that version of Twilight that appears at 5:47?
You must be playing it wrong...
Honestly the kickstarter exclusive amount isn't as bad as I always expect, plus it's only some "exclusive" expansions. So good on them but still had the exclusive heavy kickstarter market we are in.
Laughted for 30 sek at "free priest that you can keep" :D (11:40)
As a classics student, I would like to second: Where's all the gay stuff?
"It's a game that isn't what it looks like" is exactly why I don't plan on buying Scythe.
What do you mean?
@@elijahmeilak2906 haha, man I wrote that comment two years ago, so I'm not entirely sure. But I think what I meant is that the cover art makes it look like a cool mech battle game and it's actually a pretty involved euro-game.
@@josephboyne9327 I just bought Scythe recently and it quickly became my favourite board game of all time. It’s everything I wanted in a game. Different strokes for different folks, I suppose. :)
When you say it's "quite" good near the end, is that the British "quite" or the American "quite"?
Probably the British
Darren Nakamura definitely British ‘quite’ to my ears!
Please tell me what is the difference between them.
@@luiscarlosqg British "quite" is medium, American "quite" is very. So if you say something is "quite good," it can mean it's either just fine or it's excellent.
It's interesting seeing this review and the comment section, because my game group always builds the hell out of the monuments. We've actually never had someone win from combat lol. Someone came close once though.
Have you guys considered doing a zombicide review? Another box of plastic but with the 2nd edition currently active on Kickstarter, I'd be curious on your thoughts for the game.
Oh gawd, rewatching this, I forgot about the Mary Whitehouse reference. She's at least part of the reason we lost the awesome Hinchcliffe years in Doctor Who too early!
"Now, this is a huge but frankly, from a very skinny man."
Nice
I got a copy a few months ago and was horrified at how crap the god's bases are. Crap...the towers...lean in to each other and cannot be heated to stand straight. Also, the sundrop...wow...like someone half sprayed the minis and then wiped them on their ass. Love the game but the minis suck.
Does anyone else finds some aspects of this review a tiny bit... misogynistic? What I got from the early part of the review is that what looks like a C to D cup pair of breasts are called, "unrealistic" (something I find bizarre coming from a family of mostly large breasted women) and then discomfort is expressed with having them being exposed at all. Which, as a LGBTQ+ person, I could sort of understand if a sort of joke is being made on not being sexually attracted to women that it makes one disgusted, or something but I don't know. I'm just here trying to defend SU&SD since I actually like them. But to me it borderlines on immaturity, insecurity, and implies that there's something wrong with exposed breasts, when we have to constantly fight for our right to be able to not breast freed in public but also not being called a slut if we want to freely display our attributes. I don't know, it rubbed me the wrong way. Sorry.
I felt the exact same way. Also, there is exactly *one* miniature in the game that is revealing at all and making an outraged rant about it so central to the review was just odd to me. Don't really see why a female character can't be both sexy & badass either.
I don't get the boobs that much for a board game, but I also don't get a board game with a new IP with this level of minis.
i still hope they eventually do a Mythic Battles video, i know its out i know KS.. i know... but i just would love to see the video
While I do love me some Mythic Battles, I always feel it takes longer to set up and explain than it does to play. That coupled with the ENORMOUS shelf space it takes up kinda turns me off to it. Also I don't know if you've ever played Wildlands by Martin Wallace but it's basically the same skirmish type game for MUCH cheaper and has a way shorter setup time and simpler rules.
Ok I own this game I haven’t played it yet. And I can’t get behind the reviews at all exceptionalities for Scythe. They say Xia is not worth it I love that game. Terraforming Mars is mediocre (That is my favorite game I have and the first game I played during leave). They say Cyclades is good (w/ Titans) I think it is ok, fair at best. And they recommend Star Wars Imperial Assault. That game is horrible to set up, take down, and teach every little thing. I just think this game should be given a shot, most people like it. Not as bad as Rising Sun but probably not defined as Kemet. I don’t think Blood Rage had enough variety so I picked up this game. I do agree that some expansions can make or break a game. Mars Colonies is good but Dino Islands Totally liquid is plain awful. I don’t think most people should base their decisions on buying a game on this review. You should base it on whether it interests you, is it a notable company, and how does it play. I do agree though I would buy Inis before LoH.
agreed...this is a bias review from the offset. it's a recurring theme with most of their reviews. clear horse blinders and agenda driven.
Fair review I enjoyed it very much, thank you!
I wonder what SUSD thinks about Meeple War which I own and keep on playing but still not sure how I feel about it. It also seems to be more fun to learn than play like Root and it is just as well as Lords of not what it looks (being an almost chess-like brutal strategy game while looking like a family cookie).
It is definitely a game that needs more love.
Love you guys, but I'm curious what the justification for the dislike of the female body is? Not sure I've seen you guys complain about shirtless men in games?
@@micshazam842 I'm not sure how an aesthetic can be immature. I think how one views sexuality frames how they perceive art such as this. Is the venus de milo immature? I'm not in love with the aesthetic personally but I see no social harm done by it.
I like their reviews but I have to say that their complaining about how the women are dressed is getting a bit tiresome to me. If it bugs them that much though then it's fair for them to mention it, but I think its a bit puritanical at this point. I cant help but think some of this is cyclical too. In a few years boobs might be empowering again, who knows.
Its because the ladies in the game are clearly sexualised and over caricatured in a way that feels a bit macho and would make it hard to get a female player to engage with it
@@MattCrawley_Music I suppose that's all perspective though. I'm not saying it's wrong but assuming what women will like or will not seems the more demeaning act. Some women enjoy style of fantasy with scantily clad men and women.
@Golden Griffon I think that's a bit much. Slavery and sexuality are hardly in the same universe. And its very only sexual as the audience feels it is, is the female body inherently an object of sexuality? Is exposed skin?
Are you guys going to review batman talisman
Can you guys do a tapestry review, been seeing it everywhere lately
That intro was genious
Very interesting review, and as ive read many people mention that monsters are the easiest way to win. But in all our games of lords of hellas that we have played the monster winning condition is the only one that still to this day hasnt happened.
And I have tried it without succes.
Which makes me think that the game maybe takes the shape of the gaming group, since it has variable winning condition. I guess I have a very agressive group here :D
Great review as usual!
I’m not sure you’ve played this properly or enough. Our experience with this game has been incredibly diverse and the monuments have been built many times. Strange.
Great review!! the only thing that could have made it better would be if you´d pulled out an encyclopedia along with the nail clippers, like in your arkham review. I was so ready for a joke that never came.
Nemesis please! 👾
If you want lots of plastic on the board and you want to have fun too.......
Project: Elite....... the remade version. The minis look way better than they used to.
All the men with completely unrealistic proportions, totally okay. But one lady gets her Page 5 on, and its a fast train to outrage ville. Jog on.
very true, I hate how SUSD points to that as a criticism , it has nothing to do with the gameplay whatsoever.
@Golden Griffon big boobs to fantasizing about having power over others. That went from 0 to 100 hella fast
@Golden Griffon - Some women have large breasts, that's natural (are those women to be shamed & shunned?). Mentioning that aspect of the art in the review with an eyeroll is understandable, but his tone of, "I hate that, and if you like it, then I don't like you, either," is hypocritical & childish. Bending over backwards to virtue-signal like this is more cringey & offensive than big boobs in game art.
@@ModernPlague you're clearly taking the piss, mate. Yes some women have big boobs. But every fucking time a woman appears in a game, shes got back problems for days, doesnt know what chcolate is and is wearing almost nothing. Its not really what women look like. And yes, there are lots of guys in this too, who look super ripped. But there are guys who arent too. Plus, as far as the "that went really quick"
Do you play as the woman.
Do you play as the man. If yes to both, then the depiction is ok, if very tasteless.
If you only play as the man, then its a problem, becuase its not "power fantasy" for the woman, its just treating them like a sex object.
@@christopherfloody5555 so basically if someone doesnt have ur extremely fragile sensibilities they are commiting wrongthink?
Thanks for reviewing this! It's surprising to hear your experience with the monster hunts. Our group played it twice. First 2 times someone tried to hunt a monster they failed and another player went and slayed the half wounded monster easily. Then players learned not to even try. Next game only the new players that didn't play before went hunting, failed, and no one ever tried again. You can generally ignore the monsters on the board. They don't do much harm, and they definitely weren't the centre of anyone strategy. Instead, we all sent the heroes to quests, mainly to get the tokens that give you an extra usurp (or something like that, don't remember exactly), and concentrated on area control / temples. I agree completely with your comments about the monuments. Building them is kind of a null turn. Someone will eventually have to do it but you really don't want to be the one that loses their turn. Also, thanks for comparing it to kemet and inis. Never played kemet but I really love inis! Maybe my 1st game ATM. Yes, they are similar! But I would say that most of the things that lord of hellas adds just make it less fun. For me lords of hellas feels like a overly complex / convoluted inis that plays in 2:30-3 hours instead of 30-60 minutes. Don't see myself play it again. Thanks again for the interesting review. Keep up with the great work!
Tom Gurion Kemet is better. Course, I think Kemet is just about the best dudes-on-a-map scuffle game there is (and I have a fair amount of them including Cry Havoc, Scythe, Blood Rage, Nexus Ops, etc.).
There is a lot of this “chasing the newest shiney” going around when tried and true games like Kemet just can’t be beat. Any time you play a game and you’re like, “oh, this is like X” then it’s probably a safe bet that you should have stuck with X then. Ha!
At least, that’s what I’m learning. For the most part I’ve given up on buying new games and am playing the ones I’ve had for a while again. Best decision ever.
Except building a monument is how you get priests back in your pool other than building a temple and that becomes increasingly difficult as the game goes on.
Generally agree with the review and I quite like LoH though Kemet is a great game and better when you want a pure Area Control experience.
So the game is not good cause of plastic?? What kind of review is that. The other 5 reviews I saw they say it's a fantastic game so i will definitely check it out.
Great review. Are you going to review Nemesis?
Nemesis is a great game so it would be interesting to see if it gets the 'kickstarter=bad' treatment in a review
As someone who would love to own Nemesis but probably won’t because I don’t have a boat of cash to part with, I hope they don’t review it. Now if it came to retail...
@@willrfrench it is in retail, at least in germany it is, can even be bought in normal bookstores
@@willrfrench It is at retail in a multitude of languages. Its just expensive.
I love your channel and your reviews. You guys are a major reason why I went from 10 board games to close to 30. However, why are you guys okay with having scantily-clad men (Conan), but then virtue signal and act like puritanical churchgoers when it comes to women?
Well, for one the context of depictions of women vs men in media and games is very different, and has very different history. Conan is not depicted half naked to serve as any kind of fan service, while women often are. Secondly, Conan is a well established character with a known look (much like a superhero), and that look is loincloth+sword. Athena is also a well established godess, of warfare and wisdom. She is most often depicted in full hoplite armor, with an owl, not in a bra. So the context is different. If Conan was depicted posing in a string thong and his privates trurst forward in a very non-Conan way, the comparison would be more apt. The statue is just tacky and detracts from the otherwise excellent theme, like a nice living room with a pin-up calender as a center pieve. There is no virtue signaling in Matt saying that he finds it tacky and off-putting, it is a part of the art design of the game as much as everything else.
Perhaps because scantily-clad men have not typically been seen as being subjective reflections of sexism as much as scantily-clad women. (Not to mention it is no doubt much easier to highlight boobs and "get away with it" than it is to highlight a man's bulge...).
Matt is absolutely entitled to his opinion. I don't contest that. Also, I hear what you're all saying and I don't disagree. But, if you look at minute 12 there is a scantily clad male creature and a scantily-clad female creature. That is, in and of itself, equality. Also, men are being depicted in things like WWE to be sexy to women. Are you honestly going to say that women don't objectify men and that they don't find these shirtless dudes attractive?
@Golden Griffon How so?
MicShazam but there certainly are media where men are presented in a certain way to be sexually appealing to the women consuming that media - surely you’d agree with that? And do you have an issue with that as well?
So it is decent but not great. My group played the game and liked it, but all agreed that the game should always be played with 4 monuments as it greatly improves the game.
'Damn you Chris!' a term I hear so much around the table I thought you were talking to me :D
Obligatory “Boba Fett wasn’t a robot” comment
The word robot comes from the Czech word for slave or to be in servitude. As a clone who went into his "father's" profession and then took jobs at the behest of the empire. Robot is quite a good description. Boba Fett didn't really have much agency in his life
@@vwpunk99 /rolls eyes
@@Trinketorium let's out exasperated sigh at light-hearted obviously nonsense comment being taken far too seriously
So all that plastic, monuments, soldiers, monsters, cities and the Temples are 2d card board standees?
Hi, the base game has cardboard standees only for the temples. The cities are artwork printed on the board. There are plastic minis for soldiers, heroes, monsters and monuments.
The terrain expansion gives plastic cities and temples that really stand out on the board, making them easier to spot and way prettier.
@@panagitsamou ah ok
Expensions were developed after the base game was shipped to backers and were heavily influenced by feedback from players (there were dev diaries explaining all kinds of changes)
In my group we only occasionally hunt monsters - and mostly to get priests
I feel like you've skipped the explanaition of one of the core mechanics in the game - the different action selections
Other than that great video :)
Is that a bit of soundproofing in the priest-stuffing closet @11:42? Is that... normal?
I've only played once and I won by controlling temples. The layout had most of the monsters by 2 players who didn't want to give the other an easier kill. I wouldn't say the other part of the game is like a spreadsheet exactly, but I get Matt's point. I liked all the aspects and possible win conditions.
I refer to this game as Blood Rage's drunk, crazy uncle.
Is it an inside joke of the site that each video will have a pear somewhere in the background/foreground?
Yup. It's as old as SUSD itself
That is a Standard Reference Pear. It is a pear provided as a reference standard.
Totally different subject but is it possible for you to do a Captain sonar gameplay with the two expansions “upgrade one” and “operation dragon” please 🙏🏻
It's quite funny to see how many people got offended by Matt getting offended.
".... bye"
Do you guys plan to make a review of Efemeris ? :)
OMG, there's a way to win this game that's akin to an Excel spreadsheet?!? Where do I throw my money????
Is anyone else constantly relieved when the review says the game isn't that great? I live in dread of seeing an awesome game in the next review and having to buy it.
Large boobs are bad? Woman do have large boobs. Is this a sexuality issue where girls are just gross?
Crossbow from sheriff of Nottingham?
yup
A bit prude
Are the acoustic panels in the closet because you record voice over in there?
I don't think boob armour is stopping people playing games cuz half my friends are female and they couldn't care, but my main point is that I think that less people know of the existance of these games, we need more varied games getting into more high street shops. Im fed up of whenever I mention that Im into board and card games people mention cluedo and monopoly. I just don't think people know they exist.
i love free priests!
"Right from the start of the game it's just a rush for everyone to get points to try and win the game."
So...a board game?
"You're taking things or doing things to try and win or you're taking things and doing things to try and deny someone else."
So...like a lot of many's favorite board games?
Lol
'Its fine. Its just a bit embarassing and I don't want it on my kitchen table. And if you do, that's fine, but I probably don't want you on my kitchen table either.'
Is that why Quinn isn't in the review? heha.
But joking aside, I completely agree with your comparison with Root, fun game that just ends and not in a satisfying way. This game looks like the same deal. The doing is fun, the ending is not.
I like the theme. But it sounds like if falls a bit short in satisfying the craving for an Area control war game.
Needs a cyborg Xena warrior battle angel. Vagabond.
Where are all the hot young men having gay sex with robots! -best review line ever. Also best consumer complain ever. :P :D
This looks pretty fun, I love large scale boardgames.
I need one of these for Lords Of Ragnarok! 😅