Food Chain Magnate First Impression - with Tom Vasel
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 9 сен 2024
- Tom Vasel takes a look at the food Chain running game Food Chain Magnate!
Help Support The Dice Tower!!
DiceTowerKickst...
Check out the friendliest conventions on Earth!
Dice Tower East! - www.dicetowereast.com (July 1-5, 2020)
Dice Tower West! - www.dicetowerwest.com (Feb 26 - Mar 1, 2020)
Dice Tower Cruise! - www.dicetowercruise.com (January 24-29, 2020)
Dice Tower Retreat! - www.dicetowerretreat.com
Buy great games at www.gamenerdz....
Find more reviews and videos at www.dicetower.com
Get a great game table here! www.rathskelle...
BGG Link: boardgamegeek....
Tom, even if other viewers may criticise you, I appreciate you doing videos for games that put you out of your comfort zone. Thanks for the honest review.
Literally no one has criticized him yet
Yashar he’s the godfather of tablegames. Knocking Tom Vassel for a board gaming opinion would be like knocking Vin Scully for a baseball opinion or John Madden for a football one.
@@seancole22 what are you talking about. I said that no one has criticized him yet on this video
@@drbasseri Sean is agreeing with you :) I wish he was my Godfather!
This was a video of, "I didn't want to say this but people keep bugging me so here it is." With all kinds of qualifiers. I know how you feel. There are just some games you know and acknowledge are good but not your thing. People want desperately for you to love that game because they want that connection with you, but sometimes it doesn't work.
The street fighter analogy is perfect.
I think Chess fits well too. Massive skill gap to grind before you can be competent.
If there`s one thing that bothers me about this video, its the fact that the owner of the game ruthlessly steamrolled you. I think it is proper etiquette when teaching a game to other people to give them a fair chance: give them tips as the game goes on and use sub-optimal strategies so they feel like they aren`t out of the game so early.
We always make sure everyone gets the freezer when teaching new players.
This is why I watch Tom’s videos... you can see how thorough he is in analysing the game ... and how much thought and detail has gone into reaching this conclusion. His honesty is paramount and it doesn’t come easily. Keep doing this Tom, the community needs people who can see and talk about the other side of the coin.
Since it's a first impression it's obviously not a thorough analysis, which is fine, because for some there's no point in investing time in something that you feel is not for you. Prof that it's not a thorough analysis is further proved by misunderstandings of core functions. There's no hidden information in the game, so some of the points made makes no rational sense.
Still, Tom's view is valid and he has every right to dislike the game. There're plenty of options for those who prefer games with random elements and/or longer games that don't unforgivably punish bad choices and give you a second chance.
While I personally love this game, I agree about your complaint on the whole idea of "you'll like this game on your third, fifth, twelfth playthrough". If you don't like a 2 hour board game on your first time, why bother investing another 2, 4, 12 hours to finally get to a point where you'll like it? There are hundreds of games you'll enjoy on your first playthrough. Don't waste your time trying to dig through something you don't enjoy in the hopes that you'll find a shred of enjoyment eventually.
I don’t know. Sometimes especially with very complex games it’s okay to struggle until its nuances and depths are understood at which point they become incredible experiences...that is totally okay for me
@@ilqrd.6608 Sure, but that's propelled by a desire to want to explore those nuances and learn the depth a game can hold. I think what Tom is saying here is that he didn't care for what may lay deeper in the game because he didn't enjoy his first experience, and I see that a lot online. And people tend to reply "well play it more". Eh, if I don't enjoy a board game (a hobby which should be fun), I'll just move on to something else. Too much out there to dwell on games that don't grab you.
Yeah, some complex boardgames are like Paradox PC strategy games. Big, complex, intimidating at first, surely punishing for newcomers, but with a right mind set and investment, there might be something to enjoy. But surely not for everyone.
This is exactly how I felt about Brass: Birmingham and what keeps me away from this game. It's just not worth it.
First time I played Terraforming Mars, I said, “never again.” Didn’t touch it for six months. I came full circle eventually. But I have more gaming time on my hands than Tom. And I think Terraforming is a balanced game. I couldn’t play an unbalanced game forty times to just hope I got the right starting combo.
I found your approach very amusing; Keeping it professional, kind of pleading not to get what you knew was coming, but in the end accepting it will happen anyways, well, because people are people.
Great content. Keep it up
Super fair opinion. Ain't gotta like everything. Keep it up.
It's ok, Tom, if you want to say your opponent was Jason, we'd understand. 🙂
Thanks for giving your honest first impressions. It was helpful not just for this game but also for what to look for and avoid in all games. Also, there are things to be aware of with new players to any game.
Most awaited video of the year!
Yep...you all figured it out...it was me playing with Tom. I did try to explain every single card and what they do and why you want them...but he didn’t want me to explain so much. I hope I didn’t ruin his experience that much!
Cheers, Jason! Keep taking Mr. Vasel to the cleaners! Have a great New Year!
Good to see a comment from you Jason. Hope things are going well in your world.
His choice to play with you dude. He is a grown up gamer. He should have known better. I'm waiting for my copy to ship.
Can we get a Jason response video please?? :)
I have other gamers in my FLGS who try to explain cards/strategies before I start playing/understanding the game. I swear its wasted breath 90% of the time for me. I can never ingest that much information from the get go and always need to learn as I go.
With you 100% Tom.
I bought FCM because so many people were giving it great reviews - but I share so many of your issues with it. And of all them, the biggest one is just how hard it is for a player who has fallen behind to do anything significant to catch up - and this is a game in which new players WILL fall behind. Combine that with the potential length of games, and you've hit one entry on my personal list of "top offences against game design". I play games to have fun, and I want my fellow players (beginners or otherwise) to do the same; in that context, no player should be obliged to sit there for a couple of hours playing a game they know they've already lost, or eliminated and obliged to sit on the side merely watching. That sort of mechanism, intentional or not, belongs only either in games designed exclusively for tournament play (and I realise that there are players who would say that that describes FCM) or in two-player games where a losing player can end the torment by conceding and move on to the next one. And like you, I understand that there are players who will enjoy the challenge of learning to play a game like FCM well - but my life would need to be very different for me to be one of them. There are too many other good games out there for me to play, and so many that I haven't even had a chance to try yet, and I have way less gaming time or opportunity than you have (I don't get remotely enough to give even a fraction of my collection the table time it warrants, let alone devote huge tranches of time to learning to play a single game).
Tbh, having bought FCM and had a two-player run through with my wife, it hasn't even passed the first hurdle - I haven't yet even bothered to try to bring it to the table for our broader group, because I can already see it won't fit. So (for me at least, and if people will pardon the accidental pun) it's a game with a lot of potential that simply doesn't deliver. It's for a very specific sort of gamer (and to be fair it never claims to be anything else), and I'm definitely not one of them.
Fair points Tom, especially the artwork. While I enjoy this game it's not for everyone, and the designer's philosophy is problematic for people not looking to get multiple plays out of the game.
We think that it is important that every single turn should matter. If you cannot lose the game on the first turn, then the first turn should not be played.
-- Joris Wiersinga, Splotter Spellen
That seems like an insane statement. Especially cause you can turn it around: "If you can win the game on the first turn, why play the rest of the game."
Just because you can't LOSE a game in the first turn, doesn't mean you can't put yourself at a disadvantage in the first turn. The idea that there is only three states "win/neutral/lose" for every turn is just a weird take.
@@nickp3177 The important bit in the quote is "Every turn should matter".
The rest of the quote is arguable, but in games without randomness (ie: Splotter games) a first turn disadvantage becomes a loss if your opponent plays perfectly.
Love your honesty and thanks for sharing your first impression.
I actually like the board. Yes, it's obviously not pretty, but after several plays I appreciate how functional it is when it comes to determining routes and advertising...and it adds to the 50's vibe.
It could be extremely functional and graphically pleasant, but it very much isn't. Personally, I see how you could "like" the board because you like the game but I don't see how you could enjoy the board visually.
@@Phildiculous What I mean is, it doesn't bother me. I like it because the gameplay is so great (for me) and that's the board that exists. If Ian O'toole designed the board, sure, I'd probably like it better. But then again, who knows?
Glad you gave it a go. While I personally love the game, it has left my collection because the people I play games with share some of your thoughts.
I have no problem with someone saying this game isn't for me. I have no idea why in this hobby we need to force games people don't like on people. A game can be perfectly fine and not be for everyone. Even the #1 rated game of all time, Gloomhaven, has people who say it just wasn't for them. Thats fine. We need to learn to accept that.
Food chain is a fantastic game, I can't wait to play it again. I'm not surprised some people don't like it. I dislike a lot of games Tom and others enjoy... Thank goodness we have so many choices.
I can see how playing this game with all of us being first-time players influenced how I absolutely loved it.
Also, when I want to show someone a game I'm experienced in I don't go crush them because obviously that's the reaction you get lol.
Sounds like someone that taught you how to play has some issues with sadism when they destroy new players... then brag about how badly they beat you. We all know who it is.
Similar to your Street Fighter analogy. E Honda in SF2 Turbo, sliding forward "100 hand slap" destroys new players.
Or in Mortal Kombat 1 with the "trip trap," constant leg sweeping. Until you know how to counter it, it's not fun at all.
Monkeyb00y I don’t know who it is. Who?
I'm always afraid of this when playing some games with some new players and some experienced players. I always like making sure everyone has a good time, so I don't crush new people and I get reeeal anxious when I see some other experienced players is going to crush a newbie, because on a lot of cases that person will not want to play the game again just based on that first impression, I strongly believe into easing people in on new games that have this steep learning curve so we all have a good time on all plays and not just the first one.
I like how you said, "This is a game that a certain kind of player will like. I, just, am not one of them." Well said. Many games fall into this category. Some, but not most, will like it. Also, the board is ugly.
I generally love Splotter, but I agree on this one. You can get eliminated from contention 30 minutes in by making one small mistake, or missing a crucial achievement by one turn. It's too long to be that unforgiving. And your teachers should have shepherded you better, it sounds like.
It sounds like one of them tried to help (not sure how much Tom wanted to listen - it's an engine building game, so you need to start building with one of a few options, can't hire anybody that your heart desires), and the other went for the jugular.
I’ve also only played it once. Had the same experience :p
Same here. The mechanics were a miss for me. The whole experience just wan't fun.
It's really hard to form a valid opinion on a complex game when only playing it once. But yeah, not every game is for everyone. I personally haven't ever played this, but I am a bit tempted.
@@holywarriorbear7720 There are plenty of valid opinions that one could get from only playing a complex game once. "It's too complex for me." "The learning curve is steeper and longer than I enjoy." "I'm not having fun with this level of cutthroatiness." "This mechanism makes sense for a game, but not for the theme (or vise versa.)."
Exactly the same
Same here
Recruiting Girl is the best opening move. Playing last, in turn order, is good, because everyone that achieves the same first receives the Milestone, if it is on the same turn.
Your experience reminds me of the same experience I had with Blood Rage. I think it was with 5 experienced players and then myself who was brand new to the game. I felt like I was getting stomped by the 2nd turn and I got blown out of the water by the end of the game from everyone else. Haven't had any desire to go back to that game since.
The fact that Tom tried it is a victory in itself.
But Tom did like one specific complex euro this year, Escape Plan. Well there were couple of others too, Barrage and Trismegistus
My strongest advice for any first time player of Food Chain Magnate is: your first game should be 2-player or 3-player! I have actively discouraged multiple potential new players from playing at a higher player count. Happy to teach it. Happy to give you the basics, and smoke you 1 on 1 so you get a feel for it, and then you can play again later. If I want a game of it, and three players want to learn it, I will happily spend 90 minutes to 2 hours GMing a game instead of playing it. But 4 player or 5 player with anyone playing their first game? No way.
Which isn't to say I won't play or don't like this game at 4 player or 5 player. I am happy to play four player or five player with people with a couple of games under their belt, but the first game, and probably to second game should be 2p or 3p. Anyone who lets you play a first play at a higher player count is doing both you, and the game, a disservice :-)
Edit: and anyone who says you need to pick one of these four guys is giving you bad advice. There are two options for the first turn!
Exactly what I was thinking when Tom mentionned one of these 4 guys. If you don't go Recruiting Girl or Trainer first turn, you might as well conceive right here right now :P.
@@classikdan7124 That's a hell of a typo. I'm not sure what your board game nights are like...
"Suddenly hamburgers were needed everywhere" - fwiw, when we were all learning the game together, it was about half a dozen games before someone put out a broadcast tower and absolutely cleaned up with a burger chef + a fridge full of burgers, and that was 1) the moment they won, and 2) the moment we all fell in love. Big difference was we were all learning together, though. Now no one can get away with it anymore since that haymaker is super telegraphed after you see it just once, but that first time it was magic.
As a huge fan of the gameplay, card art, and the meeples, i frigging HATE the board! And how there is no response or reaction from the creators to improve or fox it!
@@markcardenas8843 Out of curiosity - is it the thickness (or lack thereof) of the grid? The Great Zimbabwe is laid out similarly, square grid and all, but never gets any heat. I suppose that could be because it's not nearly as popular as FCM.
In FCM in particular, I think the starkness of the grid is mostly required because of the roads, which are much more prevalent and do a lot more work defining important borders than the water does in TGZ. I worry that making the grid / whitespace less "empty" would make it much harder to read which houses get hit by a mailbox. As is, roads and overpasses read cleanly because the flat colors clearly delineate house (purple)/ad campaign (blue)/depot (red/yellow/green)/road (grey)/whitespace. Plus changing the board from its current design would divorce it from the graphic design of the cards / player aids.
I agree with that term, ‘the magic’. I’ve seen epic manoeuvres that still left me in awe when I think about them, to this day. :)
I love this video because I have often wanted reviewers to do initial impressions, especially in all of their reviews and get to hear a bit more about how their feelings change as they play it more.
Hey Tom thank you for saying exactly how I feel about this game. I thought I was the only one!!
My first impression of this game was this is way to complicated but I know there's a genius behind it and I can't wait to play it a second time when I have all the mechanics in place and can have a honest chance in doing well. So a second game is a must and I dont think a single playthrough can ever be honest, especially if you play with experienced players like Tom did.
Waiting for Jason to defend smothering a new player in a game that is so unforgiving for players who don't know what's coming. Had a similar experience with Pipeline. But I'm still happy with these games, if I'm very careful with new players.
I like how _Through_ _the_ _Ages_ handles those sorts of innovations that other players ought to be able to copy. For non-military advancements you may miss out on a particular tech level of farming or mining, for example, but that means that the next era's advancements in that particular type of tech probably will be less attractive to your opponents, so you will probably be able to leapfrog them if you want to. This means that most of the time when you lose out on a non-military advancement it's just a temporary setback that is offset by another advancement that you are able to take instead. Meanwhile, military "formation" advancements flat-out become available to other players after one full round of play. This allows you to use a newly researched formation to your advantage, but the other players are not completely hosed for the rest of the game.
If you do play it again, I would recommend trying a two-player game with someone else who is relatively new. It cuts the game time down to about 90 minutes, and it's much smaller board, so it's much easier to keep track of everything, and you only have to track what one player is doing. I would also recommend removing the "First to $100" Milestone.
first time players should also start with a set bank, and should not restock the bank after it breaks.
I'd have to disagree. I find the best experience is with a super expert player who tells me "what he'd do if he were me" every turn. Sure, victory becomes meaningless, but the game sure is fun that way.
I think Food Chain Magnet stuffers from the lack of catch up for how long it is. I like the game enough that I didn't notice it as much my first game and my opponents who knew the game worked hard to teach me what was a good and bad strategy.
FCM is a *very* Splotter game. Mean, unforgiving and ugly. I love it, top 10 for me.
You can literally lose on your first action (if you pick a bad location) this is the splotter design philosophy, every single choice matters.
It's a shame the experienced player didn't go easy on you. Poor sportsmanship
I disagree it's philosophy, my feel it's just careless/lazy design with excellent marketing to cover it up.
@@robertchmielecki2580 I'm sorry but you're wrong. It's quite deliberate, they have said so in interviews. As for marketing Splotter basically has none, it's all word of mouth.
@@lukerazor1 That's exactly what I'm saying - instead of acknowledging (and putting in effort tocorrect) bugs, just say it's a feature - problem solved.
@@robertchmielecki2580 They are not bugs, it is fully intended. You may not like such unforgiving games, but they are not mistakes
You should've not played with Jason!
My one and only experience of this game (three years ago) was just the opposite. There were no runaway winners. Everyone picked up a few special abilities (not the same ones obviously) which felt like variable player powers. Most players had one big turn where they raked in the money and most players had one disastrous turn where they earned nothing. Maybe I was fortunate in playing with a bunch of new players, but I loved the game and I regret not having the chance to play again since.
@@jesusfreak0912 So counter-productive though. If you want to play a game more than once, don't give new guys such a miserable experience that they'll never look at it again. I had a similar experience with Tzolkin years ago against a guy who played it a lot. He trounced me so hard I didn't touch it for 3 years.
Excited for the Ketchup Mechanism expansion, delivering to my door any day now...
This is a game I'm interested in and have heard mixed things, some people love it and some people hate it. Definitely sounds like one of those games that you either need to play with only new players, or with someone who is very good at teaching the game and treats the entire game as a tutorial for the other players and doesn't go too hard on them.
Great that this was a first impressions, not a review. Really helpful for those big games that you hear so much about. Really enjoyed this.
Great review as always, Tom! I love Food Chain, but will strongly defend every negative thing said about the game, because it's always justified.
I'm with you on this one Tom. I got to play it twice. Not interested in playing it again.
I was lucky to play with all new people. First game, one guy got momentum and ended the game "quickly" (still around 3 hours), partly because of that CFO card. Then the 2nd game after we all saw what was possible it became a more even fight but the game then locked up. Everyone got into price wars and had to sell their food for lower and lower amounts just to get it sold. Since the "bank" has to deplete to end the game, this 2nd game dragged on and on. Where most games have momentum and by the end of the game you're hitting a climax, Food Chain Magnate had "Can I maybe sell this hamburger for $3, or will I have to go even lower next turn?" Don't remember who won the 2nd game because I just wanted it to end.
I've never played Food Chain Magnate again for almost the exact same reasons you listed.
This is on the to-play list for my wife and me. We'll both be learning it together, and we both like this sort of game, so I'm optimistic. Bummer it wasn't a hit your first time, but kudos for giving an honest review. Love y'all's stuff, Tom. All the best in the new year.
Who knew Food Chain Magnate was a Souls-like?
[Laughs in Laugh React]
I'm not even lying if I say that's exactly that I thought and was very near to posting about =D....instead I chose to compare it to Paradox PC strategies
Splotter is the From Software of boardgames? I'd believe that.
Bad first game experiences can be terrible. I had that during a 4 player game of Catan, 2 of the other players had decided ahead of time to work against me specifically. Blocked my roads, robber used against me every opportunity. Within 15 mins I realized what was happening and just didn’t want to play anymore. I’ll never play Catan again bc of that single experience even though I know it’s a well regarded game.
Thanks for trying it Tom. It does sound like you had a rough first game and maybe the people you were playing with were just going for the kill. I have taught this to new gamers a few times and I always take a lot of time explaining everything and have everyone take the same first couple of turns to see how the game works and get everyone started on roughly equal footing, this seems to work well and everyone has enjoyed it even if the more experienced players win.
Thanks for an honest review.
Totally agree with everything you said Tom, felt exackly the same about this game :)
Thanks for the warning. I was almost lured into a metaphorical dark alley to play this game and now I know I'll keep staying away from that dark alley in the future.
Although I personally love the game, I am glad you played it regardless of your thoughts. I just appreciate you voicing your thoughts, and hope more people feel it is okay to not like top/"hot" games. I will throw this into the mix though, the rule book highly recommends playing the shorter learning game which takes out the milestones so that you can learn the core mechanics. Then play the full game and have a teacher that explains that the core mechanics are used as a tool to achieve milestones. This switches things from simply business development to strategic development where the company decisions come first and you happen to run a restaurant. As an aside I wrote to the designers expressing my love for the game as it is in line with my PhD studies in Human Resource Development and they wrote back saying that the game was originally called "Human Resource Magnate." The core of the game is really the strategic organization development side of things, not running a restaurant, just good business operations.
I am curious if you knew about the learning game and went for the full experience, or if it wasn't brought up?
I don't yet own a copy myself but I am hopeful to pick this and the expansion up soon especially because of the varied paths to milestones which should increase player experiences from everything I have seen.
Whoa, I don't think I ever knew that Tom did an impression of this game! It's funny, this game creates SUCH a wide reaction from people. I am usually the one who shuns long, complicated, punishing games (I got rid of a ton of longer euro games), but this one might be my FAVORITE game!
So this might sound weird, but this is a "serious" game... that I much prefer to play with casual or newer gamers. NOT with super serious, aggressive, or competitive ones. In that niche, it might be one of the best ways to introduce longer games to people wanting to test the depth of the hobby.
I don't like big euro games, this is NOT a euro game. No end of game scoring, no VPs, just a pure economic game. The ending hits hard and punchy, rather than the crawl at the end that euro games are prone to. So it's a tricky beast, but MAN what a unique game!
One of the greatest games of all time
Why would two experienced players go against 2 new players without any type of handicap? Tom, your friends are jerks.
To be fair, this game should have formal handicapping rules (like Nations)
I would agree to some extent we played with 4 new players and one person did run away with a victory that was pretty much unstoppable. I assume I will play again, but not sure when at this point.
I didn't have quite as bad an experience as Tom on my first game, but it is the most expensive print & play you'll ever buy!
While it doesn't really seem like my cup of tea either way, I wonder how Tom's reaction would have differed if everyone playing was a newbie, i.e. making a bunch of mistakes simultaneously without any one steamrolling everyone?
Thanks for sharing your opinion about Food Chain Magnate, Tom.
It seems that your main set of reservations revolves around the look of the game and the milestones.
I strongly agree with you on both points.
We made the decision to ignore the milestones. I think the rules suggest this for a first game, and it happens to work best for us. We find the game to be more balanced and therefore more enjoyable for everyone.
IMHO, the milestones MADE this game. Playing FCM without the milestones isn’t playing FCM at all!
I just tried a digital version of this game and thought it was okay despite some major thematic issues similar to what Tom pointed out. I was excited to see what the physical version looked like as it has so much potential and the clip art style looks awesome (reminds me of Fallout). Now that I see what the physical version actually looks like this one is going to be a pass for me.
Thanks so much for giving your thoughts and honest opinion.
I like this type of format Tom. I've never played this game, so I have no opinion of the game myself. This insight involving a new player's first experience with a game is an interesting opinion because first impressions are so important!
Before playing this game for the second time, I had the brilliant idea to set up a web of managers managing managers to score a ton of points and not actually make that much food. My pyramid scheme worked VERY well, however someone eventually pointed out that that's very much against the rules of the game (and apparently the person who knew the game really well wasn't paying attention to what I was doing to earn all of those points).... In hindsight, that made a lot of sense. Oops.
What points?
I've played this maybe half a dozen times now. With me always being at least as experienced as every other player. Just this past weekend I finally got a full five players to the table for it. And, while I personally love the game, after this last play through I came to a lot of the same conclusions as Tom about its flaws. By the time we got into the late game, I had built up such a superior corporate structure that there was only one other player who was even close to competing with me. So the result was three people sitting around for the last hour of the game feeling bored and dejected. In the final tally I beat second place by about $600 and third place by over $800. And if the game I had kept going I don't think there's anything anyone could have done to slow that down. If you don't lay a good groundwork early in the game, you will be severely punished later. There are some people who will absolutely adore this game. But I suspect there are more who will share Tom's opinion.
I think you are mistaken about the board. This board requires a clear overview of all that is going on. If you get distracted by a supposed lack of esthetics, you are not giving the game its rightful chance to sink in.
In that regards it is like chess. Just let the position on the board get to you and you’ll go a long way appreciating what is in front of you.
Thanks for doing this first impression. Happy new year!
The first person that throws away food get a refrigerator, also, everybody else who throw away food at same round. And this works for every milestone. Thats why you need to look what the others fast food chains are doing, you cannot play "alone" this game.
Sounds like there is a single winning strategy in the game and if you are not on board with it, you just lose... Not a very good design to be honest. I have not played this and probably now never will. There can't just be one way to win a game... It is essentially rail roaded and that is not good for anything other than trains...
@@timometsanoja9666 there is a ton of strategy on this game. There is a turn order which help you to decide and follow the market (what others are playing), 12 starting employee cards to choose, if you go first, probably other will follow you, you can stop the selling from other food chain, just adding what they cannot produce.... But, if you dont wanna play and never played, dont talk shit about what you dont know.
@@RRitter how is that? If you just follow the other players so you get all of the bonus powers... Im sure there are many things in the game that going on, but it doesn't sound all that fun... You have to do this to not fall behind is never a good game mechanic. Reminds me a lot of Agricola where each player has to do everything to compete for the win...
@@timometsanoja9666 I think Jesse's reply here is confusing. If you train a manager card four times, it can become a CFO, which provides +50% profit every time you play it. However, if you're the first player to have $100 on hand, then you get an achievement which gives you a free CFO.
I think Jesse is describing the achievement, not the card that you train for. If you only focus on building your card combo and don't make any early money, then you miss that achievement and get punished in the late game. I think Jesse is saying that it's important to get that achievement, which multiple people can earn on the same turn, but there's not a single viable strategy to get that achievement.
The first decision that most people make is - do you want to play trained employees quickly, or do you want to play lots of low-level employees? You get an achievement if start out training employees, or you get an achievement if you hire three low-level employees in a turn. The former strategy is stronger, since you get the big cards faster, but the latter strategy is more flexible, and flexibility can let you steal your opponents' customers.
The next question is usually, do you want an achievement for the first to run an ad campaign, which gives extra money for selling food, or get an achievement for the first to pick up food, which improves your ability to get food to sell? Or you can get waitresses, which provide a base of free income every turn that you can sit on while you build an engine? Or you can get discounts, which make it easier to steal customers from the other players?
Basically, no, it's not a game with only one winning strategy. But it's not a game where you can just focus on your engine and do something big in the late game. It's more like Race for the Galaxy, where you need to start making things happen early, or the game might end just before you get to start playing your big cards.
@@dreamshade this gives a less "rear hurt" answer than the other guy... Which is nice. The picture that Tom builds in the video is not pretty... And I did say that there is probably a lot going on, but if you can fall behind early and catching up is hard then the 2 hour playing time is quite unforgiving. The saving grace of Race for the Galaxy is that it doesn't last all evening... I am quite omnivore for what it comes to gaming, so if someone was to pull this out, I would probably not say "no" to it. I am also of the opinion that you have to see it for yourself in order to have a real opinion. My comments are based on what Tom said in the video...
One thing Tom gets right in his commentary though, the board looks like a first draft of the draft drawn out hastily when the first play tester is already on his way to the test session... Functionality is of course the biggest thing, but you could throw some color on it and have the sections connecting to each other some way. This isn't rocket science... There are modular boards on many games these days...
Biggest problem is starting position choice - do it right, you win. Do it wrong - Tom’s experience. I do like the org management aspects - neat mechanism. Never understood the duplicate copies of the bonus cards - should allow multiple players to get same bonuses.
My furst two games I was enthralled with this game. It is so important to start the game with all new players with an experienced overseer. That way people get ti explore and discover the mechanics together. And what a rush and an appreciation you gain for this game as not only a strategy game but a piece of art. My 3rd game, the gloves were off... I dont use this tag lightly: this is not one of the most, It is the most unforgiving strategy game I've ever played.
When experienced players are playing this game with new players, you should only play the first half so they can see how everything works, make a few mistakes and see the advantages of the achievements. Many games shouldn't be played in their entirety on the first play through. I think Tom's experience highlights a classic problem with the game vs problem with the game group issue. Some people hate Pandemic because of Quaterbacking that goes on when they play, but in my opinion it's a problem with the game group, not a problem with the game.
FCM is one of my favorite games. Nearly every criticism you mentioned is a fair one I think. It suffers from some of the same problems as other lifestyle games like chess. A large experience gap between players can give very lopsided and extreme results. If I was going to teach new players, I would run the game and not play in it. It feels more free and sandboxy when there isn't anyone in the game that is looking 3-4 turns farther ahead than the other players.
I wouldn't want a prettier/busier board, I need to be able to read the game-state from across the table without having unnecessary graphics clutter things up. Also the free CFO is there to keep a rush strategy viable. To reach it first you should be making long term sacrifices, another reason the game shouldn't be played with a large experience gap. The street fighter analogy is spot on. Thumbs up!
I really like this game. But also agree with a lot of what Tom said. I also wish there was a way to 'buy into' an achievement at a later time.
I never understood the "attacks" on people who dislike a game especially when these people explain why. I enjoy this video and it helps me understand that this wouldnt be a game for me. Its a lot of work to get better at a game which is fine for some people but not for everyone. Your street fighter analogy is good even though I played tons of street fighter. I feel like this about certain online game such as fortnite...where I rather not play than spend hours learning to build structures ultra fast to compete. Anyways, good preview.
Who attacked him??
Try Splotter's BUS, which was rereleased lately with brand new artwork (much more player friendly). Shorter smoother simpler and a lot of fun. Still I love FCM, too bad your opponents liked the idea of crushing new players.
One of your best videos lol. Honest, straight and to the point. And I totally agree with you. There are too many games out there to waste your time on 3rd, 4th,...10th play in a hope that finally maybe the game will click. Cheers Tom
Also, this is the man dedicated to other people liking games he doesn't like that he bought little lemonades and root beers to make their experience more fun.
What is a "splotter" game? Google doesnt seem to give me a straight answer
I did win my first game and we were two new and two somewhat experienced players. BUT I did read a lot on strategy before because I was told I would be totally crushed if I didn't, I personally very much enjoyed it but if I hadn't read all that I would have had the same experience as you.
This is not a modern MPS euro, you can't compare your ending $50 to their $800 like a score and think you played terribly. Someone with a 10% edge won't outearn you by 10%, they will beat you to sales/milestones and disproportionally outearn. The final dollar values are rather meaningless except in specific comparison situations.
Missing out on milestones feels rough, but these are the asymmetric player powers. You need to lean in to leverage the ones you did get, not worry about chasing an alternate way to get the same power someone else already got as it'd be too late in the game.
Good video!
Cards are not broken, because there is always the player who loses because they tried to get it too fast.
Also, new players to Food Chain typically have experienced players tell them what moves to make. If you want to, on your first game, say "Don't tell me what to do, I'll figure it out myself!" go play a different game.
Another rule I always have is unlimited undos. If you can remember what the board state looked like earlier, we will reset to it so you can undo your mistake.
Finally, as soon as you know who's going to win/lose, call it quits early. Experienced gamers usually have it down to the wire, but if there's a new person at the table, the game typically won't be played to the end.
But this is my favourite game ever. I would love to have you at my table. I'm sure I could give you a good time.
I played recently and I loved the employees and main board mechanics, but I LOATHED the milestones. Thankfully the expansion replaces them with some fair ones
I have this game, I played it and liked it a lot and I have to say: Tom is right.
This game needs the group of the same level, otherwise somebody is going to have the same experience as Tom has described.
What helped us is... taking a long break (think several months) before playing with new players - then nobody can remember what are the exact best strategies and while we play better than new players, the difference is not that crushing.
Now, should YOU buy this game? It's $100+ and you might like it or not or whatever. I would say - if you know what you are getting into - sure, it's a cool game. If not - save yourself some money and buy... some of the cube train games (Northern Pacific or Paris Connection and if you like them - Soo Line), they are very different in feel, yet if you like train games, I suspect you will like Food Chain Magnate for its cutthroat nature, depth and variety of ways to learn and play it.
Thanks for the honest review Tom! I feel like more and more there are reviewers who are afraid to truly speak their mind. I love your negative reviews as much as your positive ones. Thank you!
You should definitely try it once more. The art is very evocative of the 50’s. Most people play this game with poker chips. It is very much an economic game like an 18XX, or City of Big Shoulders. These are not points, they are money. The winner is the wealthiest. So, you were poorer by $800, which is ok in this game. But, yes, there are first turn recommended standard moves like in Puerto Rico, and I would hope your experts explained that at the beginning. Since it is very interactive, it is important that all players are about the same level so that run away leaders can be restrained collectively. And, there are enough unique things for each player to build different strategies. The difficulty is in understanding all the interlocking mechanisms and the long term impact of your earlier choices. But, agreed, it is not for everyone. And, if you don’t like long economic games it is not going to be for you. But, it is really a wonderful game 🙂 Happy New Year and thank you for all you put out in 2019!
I had no idea this game was like this - because I haven't kept up with reviews. It was on my list, but it's struck off because I don't want to play something where the first player to get it can only get it and you are wasting your turns and losing because you can't even make a legitimate play.
I'm just proud of you for playing it, Splotter games are very unforgiving and it's far from being everyone's type of game. But if it doesn't resonate with you, eh, there are literally thousands of other games Splotter fans will play as well. Maybe give Antiquity a try, it's not any more forgiving mechanically but the constant rug being swapped from under your legs is gone and it definitely has a Civilization theme.
Oh Tom, I'm so sad you didn't learn this game at my table.
With new players, I always play the first game without milestones and without paying salaries and without a 2nd round of the bank. This way you get a hang of how advertisement works and how most of the employees work
Then I play a game without the milestones, so you get a hang of how to manage your salaries and how the 2nd round of banking works.
Only then we play a full game, where you mastered so much already before you are forced to think of the milestones.
The milestones are awesome, even though they are exclusive. It's just getting a hang for which route you want to take.
I understand your Street Fighter principle, I've also been there. But you don't need 20 games to get good and you will have a lot more fun doing something. And even when you lose, you can look back and say: but at least /I/ could pull this and that off, which no one else could. And that to me, feels satisfying!
So Tom compares the achievements to a bonus that only one player can get. I think of that more like a starting power, where one player is the Dwarves and another player is the Elves or whatever, and you get a unique rule that changes how you play the game. Except that in FCM, you choose which starting powers you want as you play. It's rare to get an achievement without planning. You don't get many chances to buy a really good building by accident, like in an Uwe Rosenberg game, just because you happened to have the right resources to buy it when it came up.
Tom also talks about how demoralizing it is to get crushed as a newbie. That was my first experience with Dominion, where I didn't understand when to buy victory cards versus when to build combos, and the game ended before I could start building anything. The problem with FCM is that it's closer to Dominion or Race for the Galaxy than to a standard euro game. You don't win by building an engine piece by piece during the game. You win by figuring out the card combo that best works with your board position, and the player that gets their combo working the fastest tends to snowball.
I totally appreciate that some people just hate games that other people love, but this video frustrated me because Tom focused so much on the small things and so little about the unique mechanics. I wish he'd said how he felt about the game before he started losing, whether he liked having the card combos instead of worker placement, or if he liked the advanced planning needed for the advertising-to-sales pipeline. It feels a little like saying that you stopped playing Street Fighter because it didn't have extra lives and special items like a Mario game, without talking about whether the parts that made it a fighting game were interesting.
So in the last DT podcast, Tom went off on FCM again during a top 10 list. One of the things he said was that he was constantly getting countered by other people, that every time he made a move to get moving again then someone else would do something to steal his progress away. And THAT'S a completely valid criticism that I don't think he really mentioned in this video, that it's difficult for newer players to see how other players' actions can impact them. That clarifies a lot of Tom's frustration IMHO.
Why is there a Gundam next to the food game?
So - Why? The design philosophy behind the game is that every choice matters, everything else was removed. This results in hard choices and a mistake will cost you a turn, maybe two (in a 7-10 turn game). Roughly equally skilled players will therefore be able to enjoy the game the most. The board is intentionally simple so that it is easier to evaluate the board state in late game (it could be prettier, but sofar I've not seen suggestions how). Also, it fits with the 50s theme. It certainly is not for everyone.
I was literally just saying to myself "So it's like the fighting game skill gap" right before you started explaining street fighter.
And yeah, I mostly agree. I will keep playing FCM when my friend brings it and hopefully I'll become good at it, but I have had that pit of "There's nothing I can do anymore" quite a few turns out from the end of the game and it definitely keeps it from hitting anywhere close to my favorite games.
I appreciate your position and completely understand. I don't own the game (and likely never will), have only played it once, got equally destroyed, but loved it. My wife did not (hence it likely never joining the collection). BUT, never fear, I believe Smartphone Inc. gives a lot of the same feel with much more of a welcoming environment to new/less-hard-core gamers.
It's funny you compare it to Barrage - my best of 2019. :)
Thanks for doing this video Tom. This has helped me avoid wasting any time buying/learning a game that is not one that I would would want taking up space in my collection.
I’m always so disappointed by a game that can’t be enjoyed by someone’s first play. When there are so many amazing games, who has the time to play a game more than once before they start to enjoy playing it? Who has time to play a 2-4 hour game where 1 hour in you know you’re going to lose? Player elimination would be better since at least then you can leave and play something else...
Also, this is the first time seeing this game’s board, and oh my goodness it looks worse than the games covered by Retro Board Gamer on Board Game Breakfast! If I didn’t already know about this game’s worth but saw it in a charity shop for £2 I would put it back on the shelf.
Thanks for sharing your experience of this game Tom, much appreciated!
A total prototype
I'd definitely still try it, but it seems really brutal. Some games are fun to lose but this just looks like a slog. Plus it's fugly.
I also appreciate the fact that you did this, Tom. FCM is one of the Splotter games that I don't really like, even though I find some of them really original (my favorites are Roads and Boats and Antiquity), but it's always hard to voice an opinion about Splotter, given their fanatic followers. I agree about the runaway leader here and while all Splotter games are always overpriced, it's harder to swallow here because the components are most particularly bad.
Tom has a point with a lot of this criticism.
Not enough to make me not want to try the game again, but my impressions (after 2 games) is that there's effectively little maneuver room wrt. the initial recruitment choice. All other picks than the recruitment girl risks you loosing important momentum if the other players go of in the wrong direction. It's way too easy to find your self painted up in a corner with no way to get back in (like a price war) based on the initial choice and the common actions of the other players in the first 2 turns.
The narrowness of the initial choice, the exponential nature of the consequences and the exclusiveness of many positions/milestones are to blame for this.
I mean... what is the point of having a game where a player can end up in a situation never being able to sell anything simply because it's not technically possible for him to lower the prices further in a price war because of exclusive picks?
Oh, one more thing: while Street Fighter analogy is great, think also of Chess - if you have two players of vastly different levels, it will probably be not fun for at least one of them.
And this is exactly the reason why few people choose to play this way (or play chess at all if that is the only way available).