Both this channel and SU&SD are fairly new additions to my life. I've always been heavily into video games, but starting about 4 years ago a group of co-workers started getting together for board game nights, and one of the group always brought different games from his large collection to try out. That helped show me just how much of a renaissance board gaming has been going through in recent years. More and more, video games and the monetization schemes embedded into them are beginning to sour on me. I've fallen back to mostly playing older games now. And then... I find you guys. And the enthusiasm, creativity, and sincerity you put into your videos galvanized that interest in board games that's been building up in recent years into something more substantial. I've started building up my collection based on your videos, and so far they've proven very accurate. Captain Sonar, several of the FFG Star Wars games , Railroad Ink, Gloomhaven... all purchases I've been very happy with. And this is looking like another game I'm going to enjoy. I just want to say thanks, Elaine and Efka. You've helped me to actually focus more on a hobby that had been sitting on the sidelines for years, waiting for it's turn. I hope you guys enjoy your work as much as we enjoy watching it, and I hope you know we appreciate the genuineness that comes through in your videos, whether it be joy or the more sombre notes like the one you shared near the end of this video about your dad. You do such a good job of provoking thought and showing how games are so much more than just simple time wasters. Cheers!
What a lovely and well-written comment! I discovered the world of modern board games a year ago. Perhaps even more amazing to me than the games themselves is the calibre of board game reviewers. Not only do they produce high-quality videos and podcasts, but they generally seem like decent human beings. It's no exaggeration that knowing these people exist, and that there are other people who appreciate them and fund them, has partially restored my faith humanity. I consume a lot of board game content, and it's hard for me to pick a favourite, but Efka and Elaine are certainly among the best in their class.
I found this channel through SUASD and I am enjoying it thoroughly. As you mentioned you were a fan of SUASD and of video games ( although for very good reasons not as much now) may I recommend SUASD sister channel Cool Ghosts. It's full of great reviews and the last three vids have been masterpieces , a real elevation of what is possible in a RUclips video. I apologise to NPI for hijacking your comments about another channel, but it is criminally under viewed.
I actually lost a job like that once... family thought it was just a line. You know, the company saying that instead of explaining why I had failed or whatever. Then the owner closed the doors and left the country with the books.
This was a fantastic video. One of your best in my mind. I would love more discussion and exploration of mechanics from you guys. Keep up the great work!
theONLYfudjud Same! I thought it was so interesting! The way it was compared to monopoly really sold me on getting it some day, seems like it is a perfect replacement for an old, horrible classic 😜
One thing about food chain is that everything your opponent does is available to you especially if you start last in turn order. Which gives you a chance of being competitive from the get go. Monopoly uses dice for movement, which also gives you the chance to buy or pay rent. You could be extremely unlucky from throughout the game and it would have nothing to do with your economic decisions. Also in monopoly you can wheel and deal and depending on your financial prowess you can really squeeze out someone in a good deal. In food chain you can price someone out of the market but it's within the well defined rules/mechanics of the game. Ultimately what I'm trying to say is that you can bet destroyed early on in the game, there is nothing stopping you from analyzing how you lost and emulate the winning decisions making yourself a better player and leveling the playing field. I lost countless games of food chain online but didn't forfeit I kept playing until I I had no moves left, saw what other were doing and eventually saw the beauty and balance of the game. Anyway my 2 cents. Thanks for the video I enjoy the format as well!
This is awesome! The first Board Game Critique I've seen in any media. Not critique as in the typical transposition with the word reviewer, but an honest actual critique that explores where the game fits in it's period of time, it's place among other pieces of art like it, and how the experience both molds AND is molded by the people experiencing it. Or, in this case, playing it. Seriously, keep up this amazing and scholarly work. (Side note: I realize the podcast Ludology comes close to this in some podcasts, but tends to look more at broad strokes across several games as opposed to one game in particular)
Efka this video essay changed my worldview. How many pieces of art really do that? Board games & values: way to go. And yes also the 18xx epic is awesome for different reasons You and Elaine are making the world a better place. Thank you
I watched this video a while back but I still keep coming back to that commentary about what makes board games a unique form of art. Such an interesting topic to discuss that I never considered before. I love the answer you gave; its just so poignant. Fantastic content brother.
Well done, sir. Watched your content for years, but this is particularly great. Appreciate your honesty and insight, and thanks for your contribution to this niche society!
This was excellent! I own FCM, but I've yet to play it. I love games of all sorts, and so the commentary was intriguing. I think your assessment of what games do as an artform is spot on!
Fantastic video! Is ANYBODY else convinced they want this game?? Makes us want to buy this game even more! I love a game that challenges your thinking and puts you directly in the shoes of the subject. And it seems this game takes quite a deal of mastery, which is so intriguing!
Great video, I hope you'll have time and opportunity for more of these as they are a welcome break from the normal style of reviews while still giving a good insight into what a game is about.
Thanks for putting the time an energy into this thoughtful and interesting video. Love your content, and love even more thinking about it for days afterwards :)
You will arrive at the same two conclusions hours later that you had at the ten minute mark. 1 Steven's going to win yet again. And 2, fuck Steven. Laughed out loud when I heard this because it reminds me of my experience with blood rage. The outcome was usually apparent just after halfway through the game which made the last half extremely tedious to play when someone was so obviously ahead. This made it feel like such a waste of time to go on playing for another 30-45mins just to reveal that they were indeed the winner. Ended up selling blood rage.
I really enjoyed this video, and it didn't say what I was expecting it to. I've heard so many reviews of this game that are so polarized as either "I love it!" or "I couldn't stand it!" This is a game that has never particularly interested me, but before you brought it up, I felt similar to your Pax Pamir review; another game that I would never play and from your video am certain I would hate, but I really enjoy the message of. I have always enjoyed the videos you put out, but this one struck a powerful chord with me.
I've played dozens of games of Food Chain Magnate, and I can tell you that once you learn the deeper strategies, coming back from behind is absolutely possible. I've seen games where on turn 8 the winner seemed certain, and then they ended up losing all their sales and ending up third. There is a lot to this game, and people misunderstand what is meant by "no catch up mechanisms". It's not that you can't come back from behind, it's that the game doesn't hand you consolation prizes for being in last place. The Ketchup Mechanism is a facetious name that they gave to the expansion to thumb their noses at people who complained about the lack of a catchup mechanism. That's just not how Splotter do.
Such an entertaining story, such a dark ending. Interesting how differently you can feel about a game. I've played it several times and I've never seen such darkness, even as the notorious looser I am.
Well like most Euro games, the formation of strategy starts, and finishes, before the start of the first round. The map layout alone would determine the viable strategies (and map layout is the only random factor in this game). The rest of the game would be to implement that strategy with reference to other players' moves. The new modular expansion adds more stuff where you can effectively disrupt others' strategies, which I think adds more fun to the game.
Excellent game that can't satisfy most gamers. You need to like/love cutthroat play, lots of interaction, no catch-up mechanisms, and difficult decisions from turn one. It also helps if you don't mind not having excuses baked in for a bad showing ("the dice really favored you tonight", "I just couldn't draw the right card to save my life", etc.).
@16:20 Remember an "afghani" is a unit of currency: a person is "Afghan" or "an Afghan." Calling Afghans afghani or afghanis can be offensive, as you might imagine.
Summation of the “review”: A) A game does not need to be “good” (if we define “good” as some combination of easy to learn, thematic, fun, and socially & intellectually engaging) to be worthy of attention. B) Just because a game is worthy of attention does not mean that it is “good”. C) Food Chain Magnate is not a “good” game; it is fundamentally the same play cycle as Monopoly with a run away leader. However unlike Monopoly it is worthy of attention due to the method with which it defines a run away leader being one of foresight, understanding of game mechanics, and interpersonal player skill (aka, one’s “Poker face”).
This was very well written. Enjoyed watching this very much. I really like the idea to have an big "violent economy" game in my collection, but they typically have the problem of being brutal to players making mistakes early on and then being delegated to become a non-factor, but still having to sit through a really long game. And the long game length making it difficult to give everybody enough chances to play with different strategies.
I think it's worth mentioning that $500 in 1904 is about the same as $15,000 today due to inflation. For reference, the median annual income in the United States in 2016 was $31,099 according to the US Census Bureau. Also, keep in mind that leisure time was a pretty new concept in 1904, and capitalism was probably pretty popular at that time (especially among the people who would be able to afford spending money on leisure items like a board game). You could certainly argue that, in hindsight, the Landlord's game has been worth way more than what the patent sold for. But selling a prototype of a satirical leisure item for ~6 month's income was probably not that bad of a payoff at the time.
I think these are all good points, but The Landlord's Game was an absolute sensation at the time. They weren't paying her $500 on a punt, this was at least an obsession of an entire decade.
@@NoPunIncluded Let me pause real quick to say that this is a cool video. I appreciate creating new discussions about board games, so thank you for that! I see now that I took that part of the video as a more complete view of the history than it was intended. My bad. While she created the version depicted in 1904, she sold the patent in 1935. I'm having a hard time finding the details I'm looking for regarding the history of the game (though I'm admittedly fighting a mild post-work headache lol). Did she sell copies of her own during that 20-year period? In either case, I think it's still important to acknowledge that getting $500 for a board game patent in the middle of the Great Depression is not nothing. It's slightly misleading to an audience that is accustomed to 21st century dollars, and "capitalism" (without much clarification or nuance) seems to get bashed quite a bit in board game circles.
Great video! An obviously 'unpopular opinion' headline, but with a well thought out idea that is well articulated behind it all. More of this style of videos please!
Hear hear. Archipelago is another for me that provides excellent (and fun) mechanisms, yet forces you into uncomfortable roles and situations as you help your "protagonist" exploit, plunder, abuse, and other awful things for a quick buck. It also features an ingenious way of demonstrating absolutely why it is in the best interest of the wealthiest to pay more tax. Without ever uttering the word. Truly, a work of art. And it's pretty looking too.
Darn this was a great video! Well done! Loving the new graphic style and camera work as well, my compliments to your now full time art director and filmographer...;)
Oh, new logo! After spending 24 hours avoiding this click bait video in my feed like the plague I suddenly realise it’s NPI. Thanks for everything you do!
Great writing in this episode. Loved the logical development of the theme while covering the game mechanisms at the same time. There's one thing I disagree with, though. Not only is this a review, it is a fantastic one. I bought FCM during Nerdz Day this year based on its reputation alone. I'm not sure I'm going to enjoy it either, based on what I saw here, but I'm gonna give it a good ol' college try. :)
A lot of good points but I see no relation between the smooth very 1950's art style of FCM and the much scratchier, stuffier style used on Monopoly cards. To me the Monopoly cards evoke the 1890s or 1900s much more. The only thing they have in common is they happen to both be black and white ink art. I know it was just meant to point out a similarity between them, but I think it's sort of the equivalent of saying The Matrix and 2001: A Space Odyssey are similar in that they're both science fiction movies filmed in colour. It's true, but there's not a lot of meaning behind it. ETA: Actually, looks like Go To Jail may be the only survivor of the older Monopoly art style in modern copies of Monopoly. Newer ones do, indeed, have a much cleaner, 50's look, especially to Mr. Monopoly. I retract/stand by my statement depending on which version NPI had in mind. =o)
I just bought this game! It should be arriving today. I've been playing a ton of A Feast for Odin with a friend who is obsessed with economic games, but I felt like we should crack open a new one soon : )
They're nice, but you can very easily just make them yourself with a "button gun" (don't know the real name, I just made it up) and some felt. I got a gun with 400 buttons and 40 sheets of felt on Amazon for a pittance (like 20 bucks total?). Then I found out the felt was too thin, but I just used two sheets to make dual-colored, more rigid trays! Here's some pics: [NOTE: You have to add manually before those, since youtube ate my URLs! Don't include the signs anywhere! ]
Awesome video! Really well done. I think food chain magnate is the same kind of game as Imperium (or imperium 2030). A cynical gane that does a too good a job at representing reality.
You're a fukn legend Efka! It looks utterly horrific, visually and as a way to pass time. Now I just have to look deep into my soul and reflect on why I'm utterly disgusted at the thought of being a capitalist cook, but show me a map and I'll gleefully send my armies to spread the light of the Yellow Cube nation to all four corners. Never mind that the light mostly comes from burning cities. If only someone had done a video about colonialism in board games...
Food Chain Magnate is one of the best games ever created. Period. Also, don't play this if you don't like mean games. Also, this video is insightfully good!
After 4 games, my conclusion, FCM is Monopoly on steroids. The feeling is the same. An old-fashioned game. When there was no other option than Monopoly, as an economic game, there was no alternative but to be a masochist and hope to be lucky next time. The same happens in FCM, but worse. You pick a bad combination of cards, and the misery is the same as in Monopoly, but now it is your direct fault. Tras 4 partidas, mi conclusión, FCM es Monopoly en esteroides. La sensación es la misma. Un juego al estilo antiguo. Cuando no había otra opción que Monopoly, como juego económico, no quedaba más alternativa que ser masoquista y esperar tener suerte la próxima vez. Lo mismo sucede en FCM, pero peor. Escoges una mala combinación de cartas, y la miseria es la misma que en Monopoly, pero ahora por tu culpa directa.
So they just announced the italian version of this game (finally!) and I was looking for some reviews to see if it's worth the money. And then... I just watched a video analysis on capitalism in board games. Wow, good job.
I resent the idea that not liking the game puts you in a "very small minority" because that's simply not true. Of those people inclined to play FCM and then review it on BGG, they like it very much. No way that's representative of a majority of people. Maybe someone needs to make a game that explains how BGG's ranking system works so that more people will understand it :) FCM is an interesting case in that it seems like it perfectly emulates the abject misery of capitalism, except in real life the privilege that determines your success is largely based on inheritance and in the game it's on knowledge of how the game works. Perhaps that's the appeal of FCM - it allows us to play in a capitalist system where meritocracy is actually real, where the smartest bestest most learned person will actually be the most successful, which isn't at all how the real world works. At the same time, unless everyone is on relatively equal footing, there will be some players who have to suffer in order for someone else to enjoy their power fantasy. Perhaps there's that alluring mystery at start of the game that the person who gets to have fun might, just maybe, be you this time. But I know from experience with other similar games like Power Grid, Puerto Rico, and Terra Mystica to an extent, where being new and not understanding the one right way to play shuts you out of actually getting to interact with the game in any meaningful way, that being new against seasoned players is one of the most miserable experiences you can have in gaming. It's even worse than player elimination, because at least then you're not being held hostage in a long game where you aren't really allowed to interact with its systems like the others are. So I haven't actually played FCM, because I know owning FCM means I will be inflicting that misery on someone at some point, and trying it with someone else who owns it means I will be signing myself up for hours of boredom and misery as I get absolutely trounced. I experience enough of losing under capitalism in my day to day life I don't need to seek that out as recreation. And while that might be effective art in eliciting emotions we don't often get in such a setting, I also don't think it's fair to say something that offers such an experience is good game design, really. But the people who get to be the ones having fun with the power fantasy, well, they tend to love those games, and, especially if they're expensive, act to make sure BGG reflects their feelings. I'm not immune to this effect myself for the record. I love Imperial Settlers for those awesome games where you set it up to run through your entire faction deck and it feels utterly fantastic. But for the other players sitting there watching me take 30+ more turns after they've done literally all they could, well, I know for a fact they don't tend to enjoy that as much.
If you're watching this video, you're probably already part of a self-selected group that the statement is meant to apply to. It's quite clear that when Efka says that, he's not talking about the entire population of Earth, because the majority of people simply don't care about any games at all. I think that expecting to horribly lose your first game is the standard for any game worth its time. It's just that today's culture of a market flooded with games, where some people actually play games only once or twice to then move to a newer one, has lead to a growing expectation among many that a game needs to be perfectly accessible on the first play-through. But for that to be true, the game needs to lose something, and that tends to be the very reason for its existence (for games like Power Grid or Agricola, not Fallout or Tainted Grail) - to flex your wits in casual competition with friends. There's for sure a fine line to walk between how much commitment a game requires before it starts to be too demanding... but I would never expect a good game to allow me same odds of success on my first play against someone who's played it 10 times already. That's a sign of it being too shallow.
Obviously we're not talking about all people, just those inclined to watch this video. I still will wager the vast majority have never even played FCM. I will beat someone new at Castles of Burgundy 10 times out of 10, but even while doing so the other players still get to fully interact with all of the game's systems. Horribly losing can be expected in a first game for most people, sure, but if a game requires you to not make certain early mistakes or you stop being able to actually play the game, and then are held hostage for hours due to "no player elimination", that's the sign of bad game design. Period. Agricola is my favorite game of all time and one of its strengths is that it avoids this trap. Yeah, you might get a garbage score, but no matter what you do you'll still be able to play a card or two that makes you uniquely powerful, build up your farm and take resources and maybe make a kid or two. In Power Grid (and I assume FCM) an incorrect start means that eventually you just sit there and don't really get to do anything. I don't understand how anyone could think that's good design. Once you've locked getting to participate fully in the game behind a skill barrier, you've crossed the line into being too demanding to be considered good design. Even heavy, dense, complex games like The Gallerist avoid this. Just because it features in some games that are popular (Puerto Rico, Power Grid, apparently FCM) doesn't mean it's required or actually good by any real metric. What kind of jerk do you have to be to want to force your friends to possibly play a game where you get to do a bunch of cool stuff in it and they don't get to do anything at all because they didn't know exactly the right moves to do right at the start?
@@ephemeraldgames I remember as a kid being beaten over and over by dad in chess because I made a mistake many turns prior that only became clear in hindsight. I certainly do not think he was a jerk for wanting to play with me or not taking mercy on me. Burgundy is a game of small efficiencies. It's the opposite of exciting, even if it lets you pull off clever combos at times. Power Grid and FCM are "If your turn doesn't matter much, why have it at all?" - games of betting all you have on a certain setup and either winning large or failing completely. More exciting, more volatile. And I disagree that Aricola or Gallerist are different from FCM in that they let you interact with the entire game even when failing. It's a fundamental difference in genre, where Agricola is mostly a series of interacting systems that use players as partial blockers. It then makes sense that you can keep interacting with all the systems, as systems can't react to you. The main thing that you interact with in FCM is *other players*, all the time, and the game's mechanics just provide the means for that interaction, which is so very different from Feld, Uwe or Vital. Even when on the losing end, you're still interacting with all players and a clever move may wreck their plans. That's why I think it's such a great game. The best games, imo, focus less on their own mechanisms and more on providing player interaction (El Grande comes to mind). That does gives more visibility to gaps in skill, sure, but I posit that you're not a jerk if you introduce new players to the game and don't hold back, you're only a jerk if you don't properly warn them what kind of game this is and give them any tips at the start - but I would think that to be obvious. Presumably you want those people to play with you again in the future.
@@B0rghalRantipole "I posit that you're not a jerk if you introduce new players to the game and don't hold back, you're only a jerk if you don't properly warn them what kind of game this is and give them any tips at the start - but I would think that to be obvious. Presumably you want those people to play with you again in the future." Exactly this. And I tend to do this in games across the skill spectrum. The secret is to get your friends-but-potential-gamers to the point where they *think* they might have a grip on the game - regardless of how badly they lost or how luckily they won - and then you're away, as they will keep coming back for more. I am quite happy to under-compete and hand out strategy advice in the first few games to achieve this goal.
@@B0rghalRantipole Chess is better for precisely the reason I'm saying - you lose because of a mistake you made and didn't realize until later. It obfuscates how well you're doing to keep you engaged the entire time. And being two player, there is no reason you can't forfeit when you've realized you lost minus a social power imbalance I guess. You could play FCM, Puerto Rico, or Power Grid two player but BGG users certainly don't seem to think that's where those games work at. It sounds like you actually do agree about Agricola letting you continue to fully play the game while losing - you attribute it to being in a different genre, I attribute that to being in the genre known as a well designed game ;) Agricola is absolutely a game about making plans that either win big or fail spectacularly based on what other people do. It's a game of reading your opponents, pulling off well timed blocks that force them to go with some far less efficient plan which alone might lose them the game in the end, while simultaneously trying to advance your own plans. It's definitely a game primarily about interacting with the other players within a system where your success or failure is determined by both how well you manage that interaction and how well you understand the system you're interacting in. That's no different from Power Grid or FCM or whatever at all. That's how all board games are, really. FCM wouldn't have traps like Efka described if the game was entirely about player interaction and not system interaction. In fact that's my point - if the system is brutal enough that your own mistakes, not someone else's clever plays, shuts you out of meaningfully engaging in the player interaction, that's a sign of a bad game. Some designers understand that you can't just design a game that's exciting and fun for the winner, but miserable for the losers, and if you are going for that type of design at least give the losers the sweet relief of being eliminated from the game. Monopoly is actually more successful in this regards. At least in that you get to walk away if you run out of money. If Agricola didn't have you feed your people at harvest but instead you had to pay one food every time you used them, the overall flow and balance of the game wouldn't really be any different for those who have mastered the game except it's now much harder and frankly much worse of a game. Now you've made it possible for a player to end up in a death spiral where you are stuck taking day labor just to do one thing a round and effectively getting shut out of making any progress. Sure, you can play kingmaker, give up on any chance of winning, and spend the rest of the game screwing over other people's plans, but a game that leaves losing players with nothing to do but kingmake has some major flaws. Maybe you don't find Feld's designs exciting enough, that's a fair critique of Castles, but at least his games (minus Year of the Dragon) generally keep all players engaged the entire time. The best games manage to be both exciting, where every turn really matters, and consistently engaging for all players. I think Agricola pulls this off. I know Power Grid and Puerto Rico do not - perhaps FCM does, as I've said I have no interest in playing it, but that's precisely because it has such a reputation of having that engagement issue. I was being a bit tongue in cheek about the jerk comment - in fact, I'd argue forcing your friends to play a boring milquetoast game where none of your decisions really matter might also be a jerk move. You can warn people, take it easy on them, help them out at the start, etc. and all that's great healthy social behavior. As long as everyone's happy with their experiences with a game it doesn't really matter what some internet stranger thinks about that game's potential to facilitate good experiences for all players.
Yea, thats the main problem of Food Chain Magnate. Is a great game of cuthroat competition... where if you are not as good as the other players you get not to be last, but to see turn after turn after turn after TURN of not being able of doing nothing. You dont get to see yourself being last after doing your bit but being outdone; you were, literally, driven out of business in turn 3 and all the other turns are just to see how you cant get out of the pit you are. The fact that I'm that guy that is condemned to be there looking at my 0 income turns forever is precisely why I cant muster the energy to play it more :P
I feel the same way about food chain magnate. It is NOT a bad game. But I loathe it. Someone is going to be miserable in every game. That's not what i call a good time.
Both this channel and SU&SD are fairly new additions to my life.
I've always been heavily into video games, but starting about 4 years ago a group of co-workers started getting together for board game nights, and one of the group always brought different games from his large collection to try out. That helped show me just how much of a renaissance board gaming has been going through in recent years.
More and more, video games and the monetization schemes embedded into them are beginning to sour on me. I've fallen back to mostly playing older games now. And then... I find you guys. And the enthusiasm, creativity, and sincerity you put into your videos galvanized that interest in board games that's been building up in recent years into something more substantial. I've started building up my collection based on your videos, and so far they've proven very accurate. Captain Sonar, several of the FFG Star Wars games , Railroad Ink, Gloomhaven... all purchases I've been very happy with. And this is looking like another game I'm going to enjoy.
I just want to say thanks, Elaine and Efka. You've helped me to actually focus more on a hobby that had been sitting on the sidelines for years, waiting for it's turn. I hope you guys enjoy your work as much as we enjoy watching it, and I hope you know we appreciate the genuineness that comes through in your videos, whether it be joy or the more sombre notes like the one you shared near the end of this video about your dad. You do such a good job of provoking thought and showing how games are so much more than just simple time wasters.
Cheers!
*big hug*
What a lovely and well-written comment! I discovered the world of modern board games a year ago. Perhaps even more amazing to me than the games themselves is the calibre of board game reviewers. Not only do they produce high-quality videos and podcasts, but they generally seem like decent human beings. It's no exaggeration that knowing these people exist, and that there are other people who appreciate them and fund them, has partially restored my faith humanity. I consume a lot of board game content, and it's hard for me to pick a favourite, but Efka and Elaine are certainly among the best in their class.
I found this channel through SUASD and I am enjoying it thoroughly. As you mentioned you were a fan of SUASD and of video games ( although for very good reasons not as much now) may I recommend SUASD sister channel Cool Ghosts. It's full of great reviews and the last three vids have been masterpieces , a real elevation of what is possible in a RUclips video.
I apologise to NPI for hijacking your comments about another channel, but it is criminally under viewed.
VIDEO ESSAYS GOOD! Please don't be afraid to do more. This was so interesting!
"I'm sorry, we can't pay you.
So you're fired"
I actually lost a job like that once... family thought it was just a line. You know, the company saying that instead of explaining why I had failed or whatever. Then the owner closed the doors and left the country with the books.
Accurate
Really thoughtful and thought-provoking stuff.
This was a fantastic video. One of your best in my mind. I would love more discussion and exploration of mechanics from you guys. Keep up the great work!
theONLYfudjud Same! I thought it was so interesting! The way it was compared to monopoly really sold me on getting it some day, seems like it is a perfect replacement for an old, horrible classic 😜
One thing about food chain is that everything your opponent does is available to you especially if you start last in turn order. Which gives you a chance of being competitive from the get go.
Monopoly uses dice for movement, which also gives you the chance to buy or pay rent. You could be extremely unlucky from throughout the game and it would have nothing to do with your economic decisions.
Also in monopoly you can wheel and deal and depending on your financial prowess you can really squeeze out someone in a good deal. In food chain you can price someone out of the market but it's within the well defined rules/mechanics of the game.
Ultimately what I'm trying to say is that you can bet destroyed early on in the game, there is nothing stopping you from analyzing how you lost and emulate the winning decisions making yourself a better player and leveling the playing field.
I lost countless games of food chain online but didn't forfeit I kept playing until I I had no moves left, saw what other were doing and eventually saw the beauty and balance of the game.
Anyway my 2 cents. Thanks for the video I enjoy the format as well!
I am not a board game connaisseur, but perfect information games just seem like a nightmare to design cause your competition is chess.
This is awesome! The first Board Game Critique I've seen in any media.
Not critique as in the typical transposition with the word reviewer, but an honest actual critique that explores where the game fits in it's period of time, it's place among other pieces of art like it, and how the experience both molds AND is molded by the people experiencing it. Or, in this case, playing it.
Seriously, keep up this amazing and scholarly work.
(Side note: I realize the podcast Ludology comes close to this in some podcasts, but tends to look more at broad strokes across several games as opposed to one game in particular)
Efka this video essay changed my worldview. How many pieces of art really do that?
Board games & values: way to go.
And yes also the 18xx epic is awesome for different reasons
You and Elaine are making the world a better place. Thank you
Thank you, that's an incredibly lovely thing to say.
Dude. This is a fantastic video. Wow. Mate, really appreciate the work in this. Next level.
Excellent, excellent, excellent, video Efka. Appreciate the deviation from the normal board game videos that are out there.
This is one of the most insightful reviews I have ever watched. Well done!
I watched this video a while back but I still keep coming back to that commentary about what makes board games a unique form of art. Such an interesting topic to discuss that I never considered before. I love the answer you gave; its just so poignant. Fantastic content brother.
Here i started out thinking this was another boardgame review but it was so much more. Thank you for that, what a great video
Wow that was surprisingly deep! More like this please Efka, brilliant!
Well done, sir. Watched your content for years, but this is particularly great. Appreciate your honesty and insight, and thanks for your contribution to this niche society!
This was excellent! I own FCM, but I've yet to play it. I love games of all sorts, and so the commentary was intriguing. I think your assessment of what games do as an artform is spot on!
This is an example of a video which creates permanent fans.
Fantastic video! Is ANYBODY else convinced they want this game?? Makes us want to buy this game even more! I love a game that challenges your thinking and puts you directly in the shoes of the subject. And it seems this game takes quite a deal of mastery, which is so intriguing!
Well done.
Thanks Joel!
@@NoPunIncluded He was ordering his burger c'mon man.
Very interesting video. Refreshing to see board game content that isn't a review or how to play. Keep it up!
Great video, I hope you'll have time and opportunity for more of these as they are a welcome break from the normal style of reviews while still giving a good insight into what a game is about.
The cinematography in this is amazing! And how awesome is it that I can say that on a board game review!!!
Thanks for putting the time an energy into this thoughtful and interesting video. Love your content, and love even more thinking about it for days afterwards :)
This is my favourite video you guys have done.
Best video essay on boardgames.
So profound, so well-presented.
Thanks for making such a good video.
You will arrive at the same two conclusions hours later that you had at the ten minute mark. 1 Steven's going to win yet again. And 2, fuck Steven. Laughed out loud when I heard this because it reminds me of my experience with blood rage. The outcome was usually apparent just after halfway through the game which made the last half extremely tedious to play when someone was so obviously ahead. This made it feel like such a waste of time to go on playing for another 30-45mins just to reveal that they were indeed the winner. Ended up selling blood rage.
I really enjoyed this video, and it didn't say what I was expecting it to. I've heard so many reviews of this game that are so polarized as either "I love it!" or "I couldn't stand it!" This is a game that has never particularly interested me, but before you brought it up, I felt similar to your Pax Pamir review; another game that I would never play and from your video am certain I would hate, but I really enjoy the message of. I have always enjoyed the videos you put out, but this one struck a powerful chord with me.
I've played dozens of games of Food Chain Magnate, and I can tell you that once you learn the deeper strategies, coming back from behind is absolutely possible. I've seen games where on turn 8 the winner seemed certain, and then they ended up losing all their sales and ending up third.
There is a lot to this game, and people misunderstand what is meant by "no catch up mechanisms". It's not that you can't come back from behind, it's that the game doesn't hand you consolation prizes for being in last place. The Ketchup Mechanism is a facetious name that they gave to the expansion to thumb their noses at people who complained about the lack of a catchup mechanism. That's just not how Splotter do.
Monocle man has never had a monocle
Some good ol’ Mandela effect there.
Such an entertaining story, such a dark ending. Interesting how differently you can feel about a game. I've played it several times and I've never seen such darkness, even as the notorious looser I am.
Well like most Euro games, the formation of strategy starts, and finishes, before the start of the first round. The map layout alone would determine the viable strategies (and map layout is the only random factor in this game). The rest of the game would be to implement that strategy with reference to other players' moves. The new modular expansion adds more stuff where you can effectively disrupt others' strategies, which I think adds more fun to the game.
Food Chain Magnate is definitely my favorite game. A group of 5 of us play it almost every weekend. Monopoly, not quite up there :-)
Wow you are one lucky person. I have trouble getting this game out to my bg group and now looking to sell it.
Keep it up Efka, loving the tone and passion you and Elaine have been constantly providing.
Excellent game that can't satisfy most gamers. You need to like/love cutthroat play, lots of interaction, no catch-up mechanisms, and difficult decisions from turn one. It also helps if you don't mind not having excuses baked in for a bad showing ("the dice really favored you tonight", "I just couldn't draw the right card to save my life", etc.).
Beautiful work efka
@16:20 Remember an "afghani" is a unit of currency: a person is "Afghan" or "an Afghan." Calling Afghans afghani or afghanis can be offensive, as you might imagine.
Oh crap, I had no idea! Lesson learned.
One of my favourite reviews so far with super slick production... Is this what full time Elaine feels like?
It absolutely is.
1 of your best videos thx for the work
This is a very very very very. VERY. good video.
Summation of the “review”:
A) A game does not need to be “good” (if we define “good” as some combination of easy to learn, thematic, fun, and socially & intellectually engaging) to be worthy of attention.
B) Just because a game is worthy of attention does not mean that it is “good”.
C) Food Chain Magnate is not a “good” game; it is fundamentally the same play cycle as Monopoly with a run away leader. However unlike Monopoly it is worthy of attention due to the method with which it defines a run away leader being one of foresight, understanding of game mechanics, and interpersonal player skill (aka, one’s “Poker face”).
Good stuff. Glad I found your channel.
Thank you for this. These are the important conversations we should be having!!!
Astounding how great this is as a review and expression of oneself. Kudos!
Thanks for an enlightening exploration of this game.
This was very well written. Enjoyed watching this very much.
I really like the idea to have an big "violent economy" game in my collection, but they typically have the problem of being brutal to players making mistakes early on and then being delegated to become a non-factor, but still having to sit through a really long game. And the long game length making it difficult to give everybody enough chances to play with different strategies.
I think it's worth mentioning that $500 in 1904 is about the same as $15,000 today due to inflation. For reference, the median annual income in the United States in 2016 was $31,099 according to the US Census Bureau. Also, keep in mind that leisure time was a pretty new concept in 1904, and capitalism was probably pretty popular at that time (especially among the people who would be able to afford spending money on leisure items like a board game). You could certainly argue that, in hindsight, the Landlord's game has been worth way more than what the patent sold for. But selling a prototype of a satirical leisure item for ~6 month's income was probably not that bad of a payoff at the time.
I think these are all good points, but The Landlord's Game was an absolute sensation at the time. They weren't paying her $500 on a punt, this was at least an obsession of an entire decade.
@@NoPunIncluded Let me pause real quick to say that this is a cool video. I appreciate creating new discussions about board games, so thank you for that!
I see now that I took that part of the video as a more complete view of the history than it was intended. My bad. While she created the version depicted in 1904, she sold the patent in 1935. I'm having a hard time finding the details I'm looking for regarding the history of the game (though I'm admittedly fighting a mild post-work headache lol). Did she sell copies of her own during that 20-year period? In either case, I think it's still important to acknowledge that getting $500 for a board game patent in the middle of the Great Depression is not nothing. It's slightly misleading to an audience that is accustomed to 21st century dollars, and "capitalism" (without much clarification or nuance) seems to get bashed quite a bit in board game circles.
This is the best board game video I've ever seen.
This is the comment I came here to make. Loved it.
8:30 I was hanging on every word and you got me. You did. :)
Love the king of limbs t-shirt Efka
Great video! An obviously 'unpopular opinion' headline, but with a well thought out idea that is well articulated behind it all. More of this style of videos please!
Between this and SU&SD’s Undaunted review, it is truly a bad time to be a Steven.
Steven van Lijnden Do you thing Ste(ph)ens are safe?
Being Friends We had an emergency meeting about this and additional security is being considered.
Great video one of my favourite boardgame reviews.
Fantastic video. Well done
Interesting essay! Not all videos have to be traditional reviews. :)
Hear hear. Archipelago is another for me that provides excellent (and fun) mechanisms, yet forces you into uncomfortable roles and situations as you help your "protagonist" exploit, plunder, abuse, and other awful things for a quick buck.
It also features an ingenious way of demonstrating absolutely why it is in the best interest of the wealthiest to pay more tax. Without ever uttering the word.
Truly, a work of art. And it's pretty looking too.
Darn this was a great video! Well done! Loving the new graphic style and camera work as well, my compliments to your now full time art director and filmographer...;)
Thanks for sharing. Very well done.
Very cool video. Thank you!
Oh, new logo! After spending 24 hours avoiding this click bait video in my feed like the plague I suddenly realise it’s NPI. Thanks for everything you do!
Great writing in this episode. Loved the logical development of the theme while covering the game mechanisms at the same time. There's one thing I disagree with, though. Not only is this a review, it is a fantastic one.
I bought FCM during Nerdz Day this year based on its reputation alone. I'm not sure I'm going to enjoy it either, based on what I saw here, but I'm gonna give it a good ol' college try. :)
Now this is a review! Keep up the good work!!
Great work NPI.... as usual.
This is a great piece of critique
I loved this video because just recently I found out about the irony in monopoly's birth.
I loved the video and the comparison with art. So true we all don't have to like the same pieces of art
A lot of good points but I see no relation between the smooth very 1950's art style of FCM and the much scratchier, stuffier style used on Monopoly cards. To me the Monopoly cards evoke the 1890s or 1900s much more. The only thing they have in common is they happen to both be black and white ink art.
I know it was just meant to point out a similarity between them, but I think it's sort of the equivalent of saying The Matrix and 2001: A Space Odyssey are similar in that they're both science fiction movies filmed in colour. It's true, but there's not a lot of meaning behind it.
ETA: Actually, looks like Go To Jail may be the only survivor of the older Monopoly art style in modern copies of Monopoly. Newer ones do, indeed, have a much cleaner, 50's look, especially to Mr. Monopoly. I retract/stand by my statement depending on which version NPI had in mind. =o)
Wait what? We played a four player game of FCM in ninety minutes
This is wonderful! It’s a real op-ed.
I just bought this game! It should be arriving today. I've been playing a ton of A Feast for Odin with a friend who is obsessed with economic games, but I felt like we should crack open a new one soon : )
This was absolutely brilliant.
What are those colorful piece containers?
GeekUp bit bowls from the BGG store
They're nice, but you can very easily just make them yourself with a "button gun" (don't know the real name, I just made it up) and some felt. I got a gun with 400 buttons and 40 sheets of felt on Amazon for a pittance (like 20 bucks total?). Then I found out the felt was too thin, but I just used two sheets to make dual-colored, more rigid trays! Here's some pics:
[NOTE: You have to add manually before those, since youtube ate my URLs! Don't include the signs anywhere! ]
Very nice. I thought you might go somewhere like that
ALSO: WHERE can i get those colored foldable trays?
Hurray, thanks Efka
Great video essay 👍
jajajajaj a you make me laugh out loud watching this video, i dont care of the review i´ll give it a like!
Fast Food Franchise has a Monopoly feel to it because when you move around the board, you can land on someone elses space and vice-versa.
your actions wont lead to a nuclear meltdown... (engineer player sweats profusely when the captain says east for the 4th time in a row)
What a great video!
Wonderful video!
brilliant. well done
Are those BGG's bits holders? I'm wondering what size they are
Awesome video! Really well done. I think food chain magnate is the same kind of game as Imperium (or imperium 2030). A cynical gane that does a too good a job at representing reality.
You're a fukn legend Efka!
It looks utterly horrific, visually and as a way to pass time. Now I just have to look deep into my soul and reflect on why I'm utterly disgusted at the thought of being a capitalist cook, but show me a map and I'll gleefully send my armies to spread the light of the Yellow Cube nation to all four corners.
Never mind that the light mostly comes from burning cities.
If only someone had done a video about colonialism in board games...
Excellent video :)
Food Chain Magnate is one of the best games ever created. Period.
Also, don't play this if you don't like mean games.
Also, this video is insightfully good!
Efka I know you said FCM is more manageable timewise at 2 or 3 player. Is it recommendable at 2? does it lose anything important gameplay wise?
Looks like you have a similar guitar to mine (Ibanez).
After 4 games, my conclusion, FCM is Monopoly on steroids. The feeling is the same. An old-fashioned game. When there was no other option than Monopoly, as an economic game, there was no alternative but to be a masochist and hope to be lucky next time. The same happens in FCM, but worse. You pick a bad combination of cards, and the misery is the same as in Monopoly, but now it is your direct fault.
Tras 4 partidas, mi conclusión, FCM es Monopoly en esteroides. La sensación es la misma. Un juego al estilo antiguo. Cuando no había otra opción que Monopoly, como juego económico, no quedaba más alternativa que ser masoquista y esperar tener suerte la próxima vez. Lo mismo sucede en FCM, pero peor. Escoges una mala combinación de cartas, y la miseria es la misma que en Monopoly, pero ahora por tu culpa directa.
Whenever I see your channel name I think of No Phun Intended.
So they just announced the italian version of this game (finally!) and I was looking for some reviews to see if it's worth the money. And then... I just watched a video analysis on capitalism in board games. Wow, good job.
This review is art
Excellent.
Nice Enemy of the State reference :)
I resent the idea that not liking the game puts you in a "very small minority" because that's simply not true. Of those people inclined to play FCM and then review it on BGG, they like it very much. No way that's representative of a majority of people.
Maybe someone needs to make a game that explains how BGG's ranking system works so that more people will understand it :)
FCM is an interesting case in that it seems like it perfectly emulates the abject misery of capitalism, except in real life the privilege that determines your success is largely based on inheritance and in the game it's on knowledge of how the game works.
Perhaps that's the appeal of FCM - it allows us to play in a capitalist system where meritocracy is actually real, where the smartest bestest most learned person will actually be the most successful, which isn't at all how the real world works.
At the same time, unless everyone is on relatively equal footing, there will be some players who have to suffer in order for someone else to enjoy their power fantasy. Perhaps there's that alluring mystery at start of the game that the person who gets to have fun might, just maybe, be you this time.
But I know from experience with other similar games like Power Grid, Puerto Rico, and Terra Mystica to an extent, where being new and not understanding the one right way to play shuts you out of actually getting to interact with the game in any meaningful way, that being new against seasoned players is one of the most miserable experiences you can have in gaming. It's even worse than player elimination, because at least then you're not being held hostage in a long game where you aren't really allowed to interact with its systems like the others are.
So I haven't actually played FCM, because I know owning FCM means I will be inflicting that misery on someone at some point, and trying it with someone else who owns it means I will be signing myself up for hours of boredom and misery as I get absolutely trounced. I experience enough of losing under capitalism in my day to day life I don't need to seek that out as recreation.
And while that might be effective art in eliciting emotions we don't often get in such a setting, I also don't think it's fair to say something that offers such an experience is good game design, really. But the people who get to be the ones having fun with the power fantasy, well, they tend to love those games, and, especially if they're expensive, act to make sure BGG reflects their feelings.
I'm not immune to this effect myself for the record. I love Imperial Settlers for those awesome games where you set it up to run through your entire faction deck and it feels utterly fantastic. But for the other players sitting there watching me take 30+ more turns after they've done literally all they could, well, I know for a fact they don't tend to enjoy that as much.
If you're watching this video, you're probably already part of a self-selected group that the statement is meant to apply to. It's quite clear that when Efka says that, he's not talking about the entire population of Earth, because the majority of people simply don't care about any games at all.
I think that expecting to horribly lose your first game is the standard for any game worth its time. It's just that today's culture of a market flooded with games, where some people actually play games only once or twice to then move to a newer one, has lead to a growing expectation among many that a game needs to be perfectly accessible on the first play-through. But for that to be true, the game needs to lose something, and that tends to be the very reason for its existence (for games like Power Grid or Agricola, not Fallout or Tainted Grail) - to flex your wits in casual competition with friends. There's for sure a fine line to walk between how much commitment a game requires before it starts to be too demanding... but I would never expect a good game to allow me same odds of success on my first play against someone who's played it 10 times already. That's a sign of it being too shallow.
Obviously we're not talking about all people, just those inclined to watch this video. I still will wager the vast majority have never even played FCM. I will beat someone new at Castles of Burgundy 10 times out of 10, but even while doing so the other players still get to fully interact with all of the game's systems. Horribly losing can be expected in a first game for most people, sure, but if a game requires you to not make certain early mistakes or you stop being able to actually play the game, and then are held hostage for hours due to "no player elimination", that's the sign of bad game design. Period.
Agricola is my favorite game of all time and one of its strengths is that it avoids this trap. Yeah, you might get a garbage score, but no matter what you do you'll still be able to play a card or two that makes you uniquely powerful, build up your farm and take resources and maybe make a kid or two. In Power Grid (and I assume FCM) an incorrect start means that eventually you just sit there and don't really get to do anything. I don't understand how anyone could think that's good design.
Once you've locked getting to participate fully in the game behind a skill barrier, you've crossed the line into being too demanding to be considered good design. Even heavy, dense, complex games like The Gallerist avoid this. Just because it features in some games that are popular (Puerto Rico, Power Grid, apparently FCM) doesn't mean it's required or actually good by any real metric.
What kind of jerk do you have to be to want to force your friends to possibly play a game where you get to do a bunch of cool stuff in it and they don't get to do anything at all because they didn't know exactly the right moves to do right at the start?
@@ephemeraldgames I remember as a kid being beaten over and over by dad in chess because I made a mistake many turns prior that only became clear in hindsight. I certainly do not think he was a jerk for wanting to play with me or not taking mercy on me.
Burgundy is a game of small efficiencies. It's the opposite of exciting, even if it lets you pull off clever combos at times. Power Grid and FCM are "If your turn doesn't matter much, why have it at all?" - games of betting all you have on a certain setup and either winning large or failing completely. More exciting, more volatile.
And I disagree that Aricola or Gallerist are different from FCM in that they let you interact with the entire game even when failing. It's a fundamental difference in genre, where Agricola is mostly a series of interacting systems that use players as partial blockers. It then makes sense that you can keep interacting with all the systems, as systems can't react to you.
The main thing that you interact with in FCM is *other players*, all the time, and the game's mechanics just provide the means for that interaction, which is so very different from Feld, Uwe or Vital. Even when on the losing end, you're still interacting with all players and a clever move may wreck their plans. That's why I think it's such a great game. The best games, imo, focus less on their own mechanisms and more on providing player interaction (El Grande comes to mind).
That does gives more visibility to gaps in skill, sure, but I posit that you're not a jerk if you introduce new players to the game and don't hold back, you're only a jerk if you don't properly warn them what kind of game this is and give them any tips at the start - but I would think that to be obvious. Presumably you want those people to play with you again in the future.
@@B0rghalRantipole "I posit that you're not a jerk if you introduce new players to the game and don't hold back, you're only a jerk if you don't properly warn them what kind of game this is and give them any tips at the start - but I would think that to be obvious. Presumably you want those people to play with you again in the future." Exactly this. And I tend to do this in games across the skill spectrum. The secret is to get your friends-but-potential-gamers to the point where they *think* they might have a grip on the game - regardless of how badly they lost or how luckily they won - and then you're away, as they will keep coming back for more. I am quite happy to under-compete and hand out strategy advice in the first few games to achieve this goal.
@@B0rghalRantipole Chess is better for precisely the reason I'm saying - you lose because of a mistake you made and didn't realize until later. It obfuscates how well you're doing to keep you engaged the entire time. And being two player, there is no reason you can't forfeit when you've realized you lost minus a social power imbalance I guess. You could play FCM, Puerto Rico, or Power Grid two player but BGG users certainly don't seem to think that's where those games work at.
It sounds like you actually do agree about Agricola letting you continue to fully play the game while losing - you attribute it to being in a different genre, I attribute that to being in the genre known as a well designed game ;)
Agricola is absolutely a game about making plans that either win big or fail spectacularly based on what other people do. It's a game of reading your opponents, pulling off well timed blocks that force them to go with some far less efficient plan which alone might lose them the game in the end, while simultaneously trying to advance your own plans. It's definitely a game primarily about interacting with the other players within a system where your success or failure is determined by both how well you manage that interaction and how well you understand the system you're interacting in.
That's no different from Power Grid or FCM or whatever at all. That's how all board games are, really. FCM wouldn't have traps like Efka described if the game was entirely about player interaction and not system interaction. In fact that's my point - if the system is brutal enough that your own mistakes, not someone else's clever plays, shuts you out of meaningfully engaging in the player interaction, that's a sign of a bad game. Some designers understand that you can't just design a game that's exciting and fun for the winner, but miserable for the losers, and if you are going for that type of design at least give the losers the sweet relief of being eliminated from the game. Monopoly is actually more successful in this regards. At least in that you get to walk away if you run out of money.
If Agricola didn't have you feed your people at harvest but instead you had to pay one food every time you used them, the overall flow and balance of the game wouldn't really be any different for those who have mastered the game except it's now much harder and frankly much worse of a game. Now you've made it possible for a player to end up in a death spiral where you are stuck taking day labor just to do one thing a round and effectively getting shut out of making any progress. Sure, you can play kingmaker, give up on any chance of winning, and spend the rest of the game screwing over other people's plans, but a game that leaves losing players with nothing to do but kingmake has some major flaws.
Maybe you don't find Feld's designs exciting enough, that's a fair critique of Castles, but at least his games (minus Year of the Dragon) generally keep all players engaged the entire time.
The best games manage to be both exciting, where every turn really matters, and consistently engaging for all players. I think Agricola pulls this off. I know Power Grid and Puerto Rico do not - perhaps FCM does, as I've said I have no interest in playing it, but that's precisely because it has such a reputation of having that engagement issue.
I was being a bit tongue in cheek about the jerk comment - in fact, I'd argue forcing your friends to play a boring milquetoast game where none of your decisions really matter might also be a jerk move. You can warn people, take it easy on them, help them out at the start, etc. and all that's great healthy social behavior. As long as everyone's happy with their experiences with a game it doesn't really matter what some internet stranger thinks about that game's potential to facilitate good experiences for all players.
brilliant
Yes. Well played Efka. Where the heck is Elaine/Bessi3?
Yea, thats the main problem of Food Chain Magnate. Is a great game of cuthroat competition... where if you are not as good as the other players you get not to be last, but to see turn after turn after turn after TURN of not being able of doing nothing. You dont get to see yourself being last after doing your bit but being outdone; you were, literally, driven out of business in turn 3 and all the other turns are just to see how you cant get out of the pit you are.
The fact that I'm that guy that is condemned to be there looking at my 0 income turns forever is precisely why I cant muster the energy to play it more :P
I feel the same way about food chain magnate. It is NOT a bad game. But I loathe it. Someone is going to be miserable in every game. That's not what i call a good time.