I'm a big fan of the channel, but the title is a bit confusing, to the point of being clickbait? I can understand saying something like "Brass Birmingham - would play over Brass Lancashire". Two games with the same theme, and the same gameplay. I can understand saying "Aeons End - would play over Dominion". No theme interaction, but mechanics shared. I can understand saying "Magic (or Pokemon) - would play over Netrunner". While the games don't share theme, they do share the direct 2 player competitive gameplay. I wouldn't understand saying "Firefly - would play over Space Empires or Battlestar Galactica". The games are polar opposites in terms of gameplay - it makes no sense to say "well, they all have a space theme", when trying to compare/contrast them. I saw the title and thought that there would be a game, here, that would have something to do with Netrunner and/or its mechanics (as I would love that!). Maybe even some kind of comment, within the video, to justify the title? Yet, there isn't. I'm sorry to say, the title is the very definition of "clickbait". It makes as much sense as the title being "Hactivity - would play instead of watching Blade Runner!"
the parallel between these two card games is the theme. people compare games based on theme/setting all the time. i see it non-stop, every week. people are interested in subject matter and compare games that feature that subject matter - it's human nature. people compare star trek and star wars. people compare friends and seinfeld. people compare calico and patchwork. nothing unusual about this at all. and so i compared two games that tackle the same subject matter, and i personally found one significantly more engaging than the other. and i said so, because it's the truth. clickbait is generally misleading, but i'm telling a simple objective fact... i like this cyberpunk hacking card game more than a different cyberpunk hacking card game. and i'll stand by that :)
The Anarchs have come for the Rahdo-MegaCorp. I agree with them that the title is a poor choice, because while it is not technically a lie, it has a tinge of dishonesty, but even more it feels really out of place with how this channel normally conducts business. I would hate to see the channel devolve into this clickbait style of video title over the simple and informative ones that are the norm. I think the comparison is a perfectly acceptable one, but its only on the surface and thematic, I blame the title choice on why a majority is upset, because the title starts the conversation off on the wrong foot. I guess my main point is that I think the title is a poor choice, generates a lot of bad publicity, and hope this doesn't become the new standard.
well, i'm not sure why me saying "i think this cyberspace virus hacking game is more fun than this other cyberspace virus hacking game" is a problem for the very very very very very tiny minority of viewers of this video (because it is the truth after all) but everyone's got their own road to walk i guess (or their own megacorp to hack). and i also think the comparison is valuable actually (which is why i led with it) because a lot of folks who like netrunner might like this game because they like co-ops or they like solo games, and they also dig neuromancer-inspired settings. that's not at all an unreasonble expectation imo, which is why i titled the video thusly :) as if to prove my point that people constantly compare things with the same setting but different gameplay, this morning on another video someone drew comparisons between furnace and london, simply because they're both card heavy games about era of industrialization. radically different games, but to this viewer, the question was "why get one when i have the other, aren't they the same?" again, theme matter,s for most folks it matters more than gameplay (which doesn't mean gameplay doesn't matter to them as well, just like me liking hacktivity more than netruner doesn't mean i think netrunner is a bad game, though i do have my issues with it!) i can't stop people from inferring a "twinge of dishonesty" when i'm being 100% honest and i believe providing value for my audience, but thanks for the more constructive response! :)
I clicked this video cause of the title and stopped watching as soon as I saw it was a coop game with a very weak theme. While both games share "cyberspace" as a theme, I do not think this is a logical comparison to make. The theme is wildly different. In A:N there is a superpowerful corp fighting a sneaky, very capable person. Many cards refer to the physical world both live in: the Runner can be tracked and attacked in their home, they go out and visit friends / contacts, the Corps host events in public spaces, etc. This is just a mechanic dressed up like "cyberspace", could have many more themes and does not evoke this particular theme or any of its nuances at all. The comparison just reads as "I did not really play A:N further than the core set to try it", which makes any comparison to it a pretty bold statement (or just plain wrong if you did play it and are ignoring the real theme there). Also, comparing a coop game to a 1 vs 1 game just doesn't make much sense. The title feels clickbaity, a pity for a channel like this one.
the title is telling a clear and unassailable truth. i'm afraid you might be reading more into it than is actually there? and i've played netrunner a ton actually. but this game is for my tastes significantly superior in a wide variety of metrics. not sure why some are having a problem with a simple objective fact like this. contrary to popular belief, you can compare apples and oranges, although in this case it's more like tangerines and oranges :)
@@rahdo You can compare anything, but is it more useful to your audience or to your video metrics? It has been confusing to me, leading to investing some time into a game that does not appeal to me at all. It has been actively misleading: it implies that I, as a former A:N player, could find something super appealing here in a similar fashion. I would have not opened this video if it was not for its title, and I have been let down by its content, because this game is not what any A:N player would look at to cover that niche. Isn't that the definition of clickbait? Even the use of "(gasp!)" in the title kinda recognizes that you are using a potentially controversial statement in order to grab views... weird move.
@@MarioLiterario there's nothing misleading about me saying that i prefer this cyberspace hacking card game over a different cyberspace hacking card game (also, one of very few hyperspace hacking card games on the market). i'm appreciate you feel misled, but i'm don't agree with you on that, and in the end you spent less than 5 minutes to discover there's a game you don't care to play that has the same setting as a game you liked. i'm not sure how this is a problem, but i take you at your work that it is, for you. but please bear in mind, you don't speak for all netrunner fans in the world. i'm quite positive that there are many who actually enjoy co-op games, and many who actually enjoy solo games (look at how many solo variants there are for netrunner on the bgg forums). so just because you were disappointed to find a co-op/solo game with the same setting as netrunner doesn't mean others will be. and believe me, after 10 years of doing this, i know very well from EXTENSIVE first hand experience that people judge games relative to other thematically similar games ALL THE TIME. and there's nothing wrong with this. we coincidentally put up a cyberspace dungeon crawl video the other day (the breach), and literally one of the first things commenters said is "oh, so is this basically netrunner the boardgame?" this is human nature. you can wave away theme as unimportant for comparison purposes if you want, but i assure you, most people don't. finally, the (gasp!) was me just having fun, winking at the audience because games are fun (or they're supposed to be anyway), but the VERY overly serious response i'm getting now definitely makes me think an even stronger and more overt wink was necessary. so i shall jovially wink at you once more and hope you have a good day ;-)
/sigh....I really don't understand the hate here and the negative comments are really bothersome. I know I am a bit late to the party here and almost never comment on videos, but I just wanted to say that for someone that owns Netrunner and enjoys the theme, but also prefers coop games, I am really interested in this game. So I really appreciate the video. My guess for the others is that they were just hoping for another like themed LCG and were angry when it wasn't just that and mistakenly and inappropriately took that anger out on you. Also, for those who were so nasty about it being a paid preview....do you watch Rahdo at all!?! He has his choice of TONS of games and only does previews on those he is interested in, which is why he is normally always positive on the game being previewed. Also, he offers criticism when there needs to be even if it is a paid preview. I am sorry for the hate you got on this preview, but I hope you know that there are so many people who don't feel that way (we are usually the silent channel watchers) and appreciate everything you do for the community! Stay cool! 😎
@Rahdo, I generally enjoy your channel and you are one of my go-to's when I want to get an idea of how a game plays. That having been said, I agree that this title is misleading click-bait. And no, nobody compares LotR Confrontation and War of the Ring. Neither of those two could ever supplant the other as they are completely different experiences.
let's do it! "hey, i really like lord of the rings, and i'm thinking about getting a boardgame based on it. which do you think i should get? i really like competitive games rather than co-ops!" "well, there's a lot of choices out there, but if you really want to focus on the player vs player, i think there's two that stand out: lotr confrontation and wotr. they both have one player take one side of the conflict. they both have the fellowship player focusing on hidden movement and trying to reach mount doom, while the sauron player is trying to stop them. confrontation is a quick 20-30 minute game... it's almost sort of a chess match, sort of stratego like as well, with the fellowship player trying to misdirect the sauron player. very cerebral and puzzley. the other option covers the same ground, but it a very big and grandios (and expensive) game that takes hours to play. at the heart, you're still trying to get frodo to mt doom to destroy the ring, but there's also a huge focus on moving the army units around and doing lots of battle stuff. so, they both have the same setting, they both sort of tell the same story, and they both give you that "player vs player", "forces of good vs evil" vibe. for me, i'd go with confrontation because i think it's a more clever design, from one of the premiere boardgame designers of the last 30 years, and i prefer a quicker game too... when we play it, it's so fast that we'll go ones, and then change roles and then go again!. but if you want epic, and don't mind length and cost, wotr might work more for you. but would play confrontation over wotr (gasp)" see... not that hard to compare, and it turns out, it's a really useful comparison :)
@@rahdo I can compare any two things in existence; that doesn't mean that it is in any way helpful or reasonable to do so. Some of your responses here attempt to address the point that people are making. This one deliberately ignores it and appears to just be a mockery of the concern that people are expressing.
@@korricmorgan7666 you'll have to tell me what specifically in my side by side comparison of wotr and confrontation is "a mockery", because i think it very clearly demonstrates a case where someone asking for information has genuinely useful and valuable information to consider as a result of said comparison. where in my example did i misstep, do you reckon?
@@katarhall3047 sorry i don't understand. people compare games that have some similarities and some differences all the time. i do it all the time. these are both cyberpunk/hacking card games. same theme, different gameplay. i honestly can't think of a more appropriate game to compare it to than netrunner. that aside, i could compare it to ANY game, because they're both games. i could compare it to ticket to ride. i could compare it to pac man. i could compare it to chess. why not? the definition of comparison is "a consideration or estimate of the similarities or dissimilarities between two things" do you have some different definition of compare that i'm unaware of?
i mean, i would compare any cyberspace/cyberpunk/hacking card game to netrunner. it's the premiere game in that space, it makes no sense not to compare the two. just like i would compare any worker placement game about medieval farming to agricola, or any 2p card game about dueling wizards to magic the gathering, etc. i don't see the problem here. and also, yes, i think this is a superior game to netrunner, by a LONG shot, for my personal tastes. i could also make an argument that goes into more depth about how the gameplay overall is superior as well, but that's getting pretty subjective. but objectively, for me and my wife, hactivity is 100% more enjoyable than netrunner. that's literally what i said, and i stand by it. not sure what the problem is here, since it's literally the truth.
@@rahdo Hey Rahdo, I get why you would feel compelled to compare it since thematically it aims for similar concepts although clearly gameplay wise it’s very different. I even totally see why you personally like it more. That said it does not lend itself to comparisons precisely because the gameplay is very different (ignoring the theme). It’s okay if you don’t think highly of Netrunner but this comparison feels like comparing Parks and Everdell…
I will also add that you are coming off as unusually defensive here. At the end of the day of course you can compare whatever you want but the question is is it useful to do so? If you strip away the theme and focus on gameplay these two games will appeal to different target groups. We’re not comparing Rainer Knizia’ Lord of the Rings Confrontation to War of the Ring either, right?
yup, jen and i played a ton of ccgs back in the 90s... mtg, battletech, star wars, netrunner, and a bunch more. netrunner was definitely the best of the bunch, but these days not our scene :)
if need to compare, should it be compare with similar system? using Netrunner to compare this game just like apple to orange. in my case, i want to know is this game can overcome Netrunner. but i see this is coop.......that just a boardgame not a LCG Game. Your title give lots of player hope that there is another LCG can play that is better than Netrunner, then betray them
contrary to popular belief, it's very easy and informative to compare apples and oranges. for instance: oranges are generally more tart, and they require more work to eat because of the tough peel to get through. they're also stickier and messier if you're not careful. apples have more fiber too. granted, oranges have more vitamins and minerals, but otoh they have a higher glycemic index. also, apples are generally cheaper year round. so, after a careful comparison... would eat apple over orange (gasp!) :)
Thanks for the great video! I was a little on the fence on this one as I don't love 'no talking' as a solution to the alpha player problem. The Crew didn't land for us, but we had a good time with Magic Maze so it's a mixed bag mechanic for us. We also don't really have alpha player problems. You definitely make this seem way more interesting and exciting than I thought at first glance so I'm going to go check it out again!
the solo is very good (it's what you see me playing in this runthrough). you take the decks of two different characters and shuffle them into one player deck to draw from, and then follow the same "draw 3 or 4 or 5 cards every round, either from your deck or the virus deck, and for each card decide how to use/deal with it". really nice! unfortunatley i've already sent the prototype on to another media channel, so all i had time for was this quick video. here's a runthrough from onestop co-op shop: ruclips.net/video/jH01ywdkeYY/видео.html i'm not sure what their retail release plan is. they do offer a retail backer level on the kickstarter which implies that this will be a kickstarter exclusive unless game stores get it directly from them, but that's just guessing on my part. you could back for a $1 so you could ask on the kickstarter page itself (and then undo the $1 backing if you decide against it)
@DogStar Gaming Athough I agree that the title is click-bait, paid promotion doesn't intrinsically invalidate the reviewer's points made about a game. Additionally, I wouldn't expect him to work for free; we all need to make a living. I agree with everyone's points here for the most part, and I think Rahdo is being completely dismissive and not actually considering what people are saying (his channel, his prerogative, and it's affected my previously very positive opinion), but I also don't think something should be completely dismissed just because it's from a paid promotion.
@@SymmetricalDocking sorry to lose you, but i still stand by what i said as a simple statement of fact: i'd definitely play hacktivity over netrunner :)
it's very easy to compare actually. both are cyberspace hacking fiction settings. one is limited communication player co-op, other is asymetric player conflict. one is has more boardgame elements, other is an expandable game. lots of ways to compare, and all of those make this one hugely superior for my tastes :)
@@rahdo yes, but it should also go without saying because Netrunner is adversarial conflict between players which is a style of game you very much dislike, and this is a co-op which is a style of game you love. They don't really seem comparable except on theme. You are of course free to make any comparison you like, but you can also expect to draw criticism for it. This is a lot like saying "Legends of Andor: would play over Magic the Gathering". No doubt true, but not a useful comparison and provocative enough to draw fire from fans of a beloved game.
@@whittaker007 they're two games in the same very small bucket of "cyberpunk hacker card games". there are very few games in this bucket. i can't imagine why one wouldn't draw comparisons between the two. legends of andor is a LOT farther away from Magic the Gathering than these two games. One is a board game, one is a card game; one is epic quests, one is dueling. These two games, otoh, are both about cyberspace hackers fighting viruses by playing cards. There are very few other card games with this setting. They're both practically set in the same Gibson-inspired universe. The validity of comparing the two is obvious to me, just like people compare games about growing flowers that are radically different, or games about wine making that are radically different. The number of people who say "what should I get, calico or patchwork" because they're both about quilts is VERY high, and no one blinks an eye when people ask for comparisons. This happens ALL THE TIME in the board gaming world. We put up Bark Avenue video the other day on the channel, and instantly people started asking "but how does it compare to Dog Park?" because they have the same theme... RADCIALLY different gameplay, but same theme. No difference here. And re: the "i'm known to like co-ops and dislike cutthroat games"... the majority of people who will end up watching this video are not subscribers of mine. A lot of people who watch it will have never seen one of my videos before. They don't know my preferences. So I'm making a statement: this is a cyberpunk card game about hacking viruses, like netrunner. I think this is a better game. A more fun game (imo). A fresher design (imo). A game with broader appealing gameplay. etc. etc. I stand by all of those statements, though all i said is "i would rather play this than netrunner" which is a statement of simple fact. in what universe should that be provocative?
Just here to show support. Both hubby and I didn't think this was a click bait at all. No clue why some are so triggered. Especially coming from you, we know a title like that wouldn't be a clickbait. That's just not you. We knew it only described your opinion about a game you now enjoy more than netrunner. Love your enthusiasm as always!
thank you, i really appreciate it. today was an incredibly tough day for my family, and all of this... didn't help. at first it was just kind of fun... a silly internet debate about the definition of the word "comparison", and thought exercises like comparing apples and oranges (literally) and at first it was letting me forget my troubles, but things started to turn nastier with accusations of impropriety and malice and whatnot. glad it seems to be mostly over now, and i really shouldn't take the bait (irony!) yeah, not sure why this is such a hot button topic for some folks... someone on facebook did tell me "netrunner fans take their game VERY seriously"... i guess i just didn't realize how much :(
hi there. if you're a netrunner fan and you're upset because i said that i like this hyperspace virus hacking card game more than your preferred hyperspace virus hacking card game, and you feel i misled you into watching a "useless video" for a few minutes, let me suggest a potential use case: let's say at some point in the near future, you might find yourself playing netrunner with someone, and you might ask them "what other games do you like" and they might say "oh, i really like pandemic" or "oh, i really like hanabi" or "oh, i really like gloomhaven" or "oh, i really like solo games" well you're in luck! you can tell them about this hyperspace virus hacking card game you recently heard about and maybe they'd like to check it out. Boom, useful video content, germane to your gaming tastes. Huzzah! anyway, it's just a suggestion... happy running and stay rezzed! ;-)
Sorry, I couldn't hear you over the part where it's paid promotion. If it's similar, say it's similar, but don't ride the coattails of one of the best games of all time for clicks.
@@DogStarGamingGR so what, because you think netrunner is one of the greatest games of all time, i'm not allowed to like a game better than it? that''s not how personal preference works tbh. but the fact that you're inclined to dismiss me and my point out of hand i think says more about you than me, but you gotta do you, i reckon! as i said above, keep running! :)
@@rahdo *paid* preference. About something only similar on a topical level. It's like comparing Philadelphia to Jury Duty because they're both courtroom movies.
@@DogStarGamingGR why not? let's do that comparison! customer: "hi there! i really like courtroom movies. what do you recommend" blockbuster employee: "well, what do you feel like tonight? maybe philadelphia? it's got academy award winning performances and is a powerful drama about the fight around gay rights. but bear in mind, it's heavy. it will make you cry, but it also lifts the soul. otoh, if you're looking for a silly good time, maybe jury duty. it's a dumb screwball comedy, it certainly wont win any awards. but it's interesting that it focuses more on the jury side of the court battle rather than they lawyer side, which is kind of unique. me, i tend to enjoy dumb comedies, so i'd watch jury duty (gasp!)" and end scene. somehow, i've managed to compare two different things about the same topic, and reveal things about both. it's almost like the word comparison means "a consideration or estimate of the similarities or dissimilarities between two things" and it's something people do all the time :)
hehe, had to come back to report that literally the next comment I'm going through in my morning channel check routine was somebody comparing furnace against london, as if to prove my point that people compare radically different games with similar themes ALL THE TIME :)
Funny Rahdo, a lot of people are upset at you for comparing Netrunner to this game, I otoh, clicked on the video looking for a comparison, and unless I missed it, never even heard you mention Netrunner (except in the title). Oh well, still love the channel Rahdo, and your responses.
Yep, it's funny. I didn't actually make the reference in the video but I would have if it had occurred to me at the time (remember this was an excerpt from an hour-long video and I talked about it near the end of that video because it rated so high). When posting I always try to get some little half-sentence blurb for these "rapid reviews" to make them stand out from my normal runthroughs for the regular vierwers, (and also just to have a little fun, hence the jokey gasp!) and so that the audience has some idea of what to expect in the video. And since this is a cyberpunk virus hacking card game, it just made sense to me to let folks know I'm talking about exactly that, and there's no better reference point in the industry the netrunner. Go figure :-)
Looking through the comments, I get that there's no reason why you shouldn't compare the two games given that they share a theme. The issue is, did you? You included in the title that you'd play this over Netrunner but never once in the video did you do an actual comparison. Had you explained in the video more on why you preferred one over the other I feel you'd have received much less blowback than you did. Perhaps you like co-op games more than 1v1 duels, perhaps you felt this game provided a greater level of thematic immersion than Netrunner, whatever, anything to that effect. But you didn't, you dropped a very spicy take in the title and then kinda proceeded to walk away. I'm sure as a content creator you're not unaware of how your comments might be interpreted. So all this feels like a you're just being deliberately provocative, stepping on something a lot of people love in order to gain clicks for your video. I must say it is disappointing.
i don't think me saying I like X over Y is particularly provocative. if, in 1977, i had said "i like star wars more than star trek", i don't think anyone would have a problem with that, so not sure why the exact same type of comparison in 2022 is such a big deal, but i guess that's what the internet is all about :)
I'm a big fan of the channel, but the title is a bit confusing, to the point of being clickbait?
I can understand saying something like "Brass Birmingham - would play over Brass Lancashire". Two games with the same theme, and the same gameplay.
I can understand saying "Aeons End - would play over Dominion". No theme interaction, but mechanics shared.
I can understand saying "Magic (or Pokemon) - would play over Netrunner". While the games don't share theme, they do share the direct 2 player competitive gameplay.
I wouldn't understand saying "Firefly - would play over Space Empires or Battlestar Galactica". The games are polar opposites in terms of gameplay - it makes no sense to say "well, they all have a space theme", when trying to compare/contrast them.
I saw the title and thought that there would be a game, here, that would have something to do with Netrunner and/or its mechanics (as I would love that!). Maybe even some kind of comment, within the video, to justify the title? Yet, there isn't. I'm sorry to say, the title is the very definition of "clickbait". It makes as much sense as the title being "Hactivity - would play instead of watching Blade Runner!"
the parallel between these two card games is the theme. people compare games based on theme/setting all the time. i see it non-stop, every week. people are interested in subject matter and compare games that feature that subject matter - it's human nature. people compare star trek and star wars. people compare friends and seinfeld. people compare calico and patchwork. nothing unusual about this at all.
and so i compared two games that tackle the same subject matter, and i personally found one significantly more engaging than the other. and i said so, because it's the truth. clickbait is generally misleading, but i'm telling a simple objective fact... i like this cyberpunk hacking card game more than a different cyberpunk hacking card game. and i'll stand by that :)
The Anarchs have come for the Rahdo-MegaCorp. I agree with them that the title is a poor choice, because while it is not technically a lie, it has a tinge of dishonesty, but even more it feels really out of place with how this channel normally conducts business. I would hate to see the channel devolve into this clickbait style of video title over the simple and informative ones that are the norm.
I think the comparison is a perfectly acceptable one, but its only on the surface and thematic, I blame the title choice on why a majority is upset, because the title starts the conversation off on the wrong foot. I guess my main point is that I think the title is a poor choice, generates a lot of bad publicity, and hope this doesn't become the new standard.
well, i'm not sure why me saying "i think this cyberspace virus hacking game is more fun than this other cyberspace virus hacking game" is a problem for the very very very very very tiny minority of viewers of this video (because it is the truth after all) but everyone's got their own road to walk i guess (or their own megacorp to hack). and i also think the comparison is valuable actually (which is why i led with it) because a lot of folks who like netrunner might like this game because they like co-ops or they like solo games, and they also dig neuromancer-inspired settings. that's not at all an unreasonble expectation imo, which is why i titled the video thusly :)
as if to prove my point that people constantly compare things with the same setting but different gameplay, this morning on another video someone drew comparisons between furnace and london, simply because they're both card heavy games about era of industrialization. radically different games, but to this viewer, the question was "why get one when i have the other, aren't they the same?" again, theme matter,s for most folks it matters more than gameplay (which doesn't mean gameplay doesn't matter to them as well, just like me liking hacktivity more than netruner doesn't mean i think netrunner is a bad game, though i do have my issues with it!)
i can't stop people from inferring a "twinge of dishonesty" when i'm being 100% honest and i believe providing value for my audience, but thanks for the more constructive response! :)
I clicked this video cause of the title and stopped watching as soon as I saw it was a coop game with a very weak theme.
While both games share "cyberspace" as a theme, I do not think this is a logical comparison to make. The theme is wildly different. In A:N there is a superpowerful corp fighting a sneaky, very capable person. Many cards refer to the physical world both live in: the Runner can be tracked and attacked in their home, they go out and visit friends / contacts, the Corps host events in public spaces, etc. This is just a mechanic dressed up like "cyberspace", could have many more themes and does not evoke this particular theme or any of its nuances at all.
The comparison just reads as "I did not really play A:N further than the core set to try it", which makes any comparison to it a pretty bold statement (or just plain wrong if you did play it and are ignoring the real theme there). Also, comparing a coop game to a 1 vs 1 game just doesn't make much sense. The title feels clickbaity, a pity for a channel like this one.
the title is telling a clear and unassailable truth. i'm afraid you might be reading more into it than is actually there? and i've played netrunner a ton actually. but this game is for my tastes significantly superior in a wide variety of metrics. not sure why some are having a problem with a simple objective fact like this.
contrary to popular belief, you can compare apples and oranges, although in this case it's more like tangerines and oranges :)
@@rahdo You can compare anything, but is it more useful to your audience or to your video metrics? It has been confusing to me, leading to investing some time into a game that does not appeal to me at all. It has been actively misleading: it implies that I, as a former A:N player, could find something super appealing here in a similar fashion. I would have not opened this video if it was not for its title, and I have been let down by its content, because this game is not what any A:N player would look at to cover that niche. Isn't that the definition of clickbait?
Even the use of "(gasp!)" in the title kinda recognizes that you are using a potentially controversial statement in order to grab views... weird move.
@@MarioLiterario there's nothing misleading about me saying that i prefer this cyberspace hacking card game over a different cyberspace hacking card game (also, one of very few hyperspace hacking card games on the market). i'm appreciate you feel misled, but i'm don't agree with you on that, and in the end you spent less than 5 minutes to discover there's a game you don't care to play that has the same setting as a game you liked. i'm not sure how this is a problem, but i take you at your work that it is, for you.
but please bear in mind, you don't speak for all netrunner fans in the world. i'm quite positive that there are many who actually enjoy co-op games, and many who actually enjoy solo games (look at how many solo variants there are for netrunner on the bgg forums).
so just because you were disappointed to find a co-op/solo game with the same setting as netrunner doesn't mean others will be. and believe me, after 10 years of doing this, i know very well from EXTENSIVE first hand experience that people judge games relative to other thematically similar games ALL THE TIME. and there's nothing wrong with this. we coincidentally put up a cyberspace dungeon crawl video the other day (the breach), and literally one of the first things commenters said is "oh, so is this basically netrunner the boardgame?" this is human nature. you can wave away theme as unimportant for comparison purposes if you want, but i assure you, most people don't.
finally, the (gasp!) was me just having fun, winking at the audience because games are fun (or they're supposed to be anyway), but the VERY overly serious response i'm getting now definitely makes me think an even stronger and more overt wink was necessary. so i shall jovially wink at you once more and hope you have a good day ;-)
/sigh....I really don't understand the hate here and the negative comments are really bothersome. I know I am a bit late to the party here and almost never comment on videos, but I just wanted to say that for someone that owns Netrunner and enjoys the theme, but also prefers coop games, I am really interested in this game. So I really appreciate the video. My guess for the others is that they were just hoping for another like themed LCG and were angry when it wasn't just that and mistakenly and inappropriately took that anger out on you.
Also, for those who were so nasty about it being a paid preview....do you watch Rahdo at all!?! He has his choice of TONS of games and only does previews on those he is interested in, which is why he is normally always positive on the game being previewed. Also, he offers criticism when there needs to be even if it is a paid preview.
I am sorry for the hate you got on this preview, but I hope you know that there are so many people who don't feel that way (we are usually the silent channel watchers) and appreciate everything you do for the community! Stay cool! 😎
@Rahdo, I generally enjoy your channel and you are one of my go-to's when I want to get an idea of how a game plays. That having been said, I agree that this title is misleading click-bait. And no, nobody compares LotR Confrontation and War of the Ring. Neither of those two could ever supplant the other as they are completely different experiences.
let's do it!
"hey, i really like lord of the rings, and i'm thinking about getting a boardgame based on it. which do you think i should get? i really like competitive games rather than co-ops!"
"well, there's a lot of choices out there, but if you really want to focus on the player vs player, i think there's two that stand out: lotr confrontation and wotr. they both have one player take one side of the conflict. they both have the fellowship player focusing on hidden movement and trying to reach mount doom, while the sauron player is trying to stop them.
confrontation is a quick 20-30 minute game... it's almost sort of a chess match, sort of stratego like as well, with the fellowship player trying to misdirect the sauron player. very cerebral and puzzley.
the other option covers the same ground, but it a very big and grandios (and expensive) game that takes hours to play. at the heart, you're still trying to get frodo to mt doom to destroy the ring, but there's also a huge focus on moving the army units around and doing lots of battle stuff.
so, they both have the same setting, they both sort of tell the same story, and they both give you that "player vs player", "forces of good vs evil" vibe. for me, i'd go with confrontation because i think it's a more clever design, from one of the premiere boardgame designers of the last 30 years, and i prefer a quicker game too... when we play it, it's so fast that we'll go ones, and then change roles and then go again!. but if you want epic, and don't mind length and cost, wotr might work more for you.
but would play confrontation over wotr (gasp)"
see... not that hard to compare, and it turns out, it's a really useful comparison :)
@@rahdo I can compare any two things in existence; that doesn't mean that it is in any way helpful or reasonable to do so. Some of your responses here attempt to address the point that people are making. This one deliberately ignores it and appears to just be a mockery of the concern that people are expressing.
@@korricmorgan7666 you'll have to tell me what specifically in my side by side comparison of wotr and confrontation is "a mockery", because i think it very clearly demonstrates a case where someone asking for information has genuinely useful and valuable information to consider as a result of said comparison. where in my example did i misstep, do you reckon?
Seems nice but I wouldn't compare it to netrunner
i much prefer this cyberspace to that cyberspace and I stand by it! :)
@@katarhall3047 sorry i don't understand. people compare games that have some similarities and some differences all the time. i do it all the time. these are both cyberpunk/hacking card games. same theme, different gameplay. i honestly can't think of a more appropriate game to compare it to than netrunner.
that aside, i could compare it to ANY game, because they're both games. i could compare it to ticket to ride. i could compare it to pac man. i could compare it to chess. why not? the definition of comparison is "a consideration or estimate of the similarities or dissimilarities between two things" do you have some different definition of compare that i'm unaware of?
i mean, i would compare any cyberspace/cyberpunk/hacking card game to netrunner. it's the premiere game in that space, it makes no sense not to compare the two. just like i would compare any worker placement game about medieval farming to agricola, or any 2p card game about dueling wizards to magic the gathering, etc. i don't see the problem here.
and also, yes, i think this is a superior game to netrunner, by a LONG shot, for my personal tastes. i could also make an argument that goes into more depth about how the gameplay overall is superior as well, but that's getting pretty subjective. but objectively, for me and my wife, hactivity is 100% more enjoyable than netrunner. that's literally what i said, and i stand by it. not sure what the problem is here, since it's literally the truth.
@@rahdo Hey Rahdo, I get why you would feel compelled to compare it since thematically it aims for similar concepts although clearly gameplay wise it’s very different. I even totally see why you personally like it more. That said it does not lend itself to comparisons precisely because the gameplay is very different (ignoring the theme). It’s okay if you don’t think highly of Netrunner but this comparison feels like comparing Parks and Everdell…
I will also add that you are coming off as unusually defensive here. At the end of the day of course you can compare whatever you want but the question is is it useful to do so? If you strip away the theme and focus on gameplay these two games will appeal to different target groups. We’re not comparing Rainer Knizia’ Lord of the Rings Confrontation to War of the Ring either, right?
(Gasp!) never knew carebear rahdo used to play one v one Netrunner! Glad there’s a coop game in the same theme!
yup, jen and i played a ton of ccgs back in the 90s... mtg, battletech, star wars, netrunner, and a bunch more. netrunner was definitely the best of the bunch, but these days not our scene :)
if need to compare, should it be compare with similar system? using Netrunner to compare this game just like apple to orange.
in my case, i want to know is this game can overcome Netrunner. but i see this is coop.......that just a boardgame not a LCG Game.
Your title give lots of player hope that there is another LCG can play that is better than Netrunner, then betray them
contrary to popular belief, it's very easy and informative to compare apples and oranges. for instance:
oranges are generally more tart, and they require more work to eat because of the tough peel to get through. they're also stickier and messier if you're not careful. apples have more fiber too. granted, oranges have more vitamins and minerals, but otoh they have a higher glycemic index. also, apples are generally cheaper year round.
so, after a careful comparison... would eat apple over orange (gasp!) :)
Thanks for the great video! I was a little on the fence on this one as I don't love 'no talking' as a solution to the alpha player problem. The Crew didn't land for us, but we had a good time with Magic Maze so it's a mixed bag mechanic for us. We also don't really have alpha player problems. You definitely make this seem way more interesting and exciting than I thought at first glance so I'm going to go check it out again!
Bottom line when can we buy it not in ks?
How is the solo?
When can we see the play through?
the solo is very good (it's what you see me playing in this runthrough). you take the decks of two different characters and shuffle them into one player deck to draw from, and then follow the same "draw 3 or 4 or 5 cards every round, either from your deck or the virus deck, and for each card decide how to use/deal with it". really nice!
unfortunatley i've already sent the prototype on to another media channel, so all i had time for was this quick video. here's a runthrough from onestop co-op shop: ruclips.net/video/jH01ywdkeYY/видео.html
i'm not sure what their retail release plan is. they do offer a retail backer level on the kickstarter which implies that this will be a kickstarter exclusive unless game stores get it directly from them, but that's just guessing on my part. you could back for a $1 so you could ask on the kickstarter page itself (and then undo the $1 backing if you decide against it)
@@rahdo got it thanks, I'll watch the full play through first and then decide
@DogStar Gaming Athough I agree that the title is click-bait, paid promotion doesn't intrinsically invalidate the reviewer's points made about a game. Additionally, I wouldn't expect him to work for free; we all need to make a living. I agree with everyone's points here for the most part, and I think Rahdo is being completely dismissive and not actually considering what people are saying (his channel, his prerogative, and it's affected my previously very positive opinion), but I also don't think something should be completely dismissed just because it's from a paid promotion.
I just unsubscribed. The ridiculous level of click-bait in the title is far too negative for a Rahdo video.
@@SymmetricalDocking sorry to lose you, but i still stand by what i said as a simple statement of fact: i'd definitely play hacktivity over netrunner :)
What a clickbait title.. How can you compare this to one of the greatest game ever, shame..
it's very easy to compare actually. both are cyberspace hacking fiction settings. one is limited communication player co-op, other is asymetric player conflict. one is has more boardgame elements, other is an expandable game. lots of ways to compare, and all of those make this one hugely superior for my tastes :)
@@rahdo yes, but it should also go without saying because Netrunner is adversarial conflict between players which is a style of game you very much dislike, and this is a co-op which is a style of game you love. They don't really seem comparable except on theme. You are of course free to make any comparison you like, but you can also expect to draw criticism for it. This is a lot like saying "Legends of Andor: would play over Magic the Gathering". No doubt true, but not a useful comparison and provocative enough to draw fire from fans of a beloved game.
@@whittaker007 they're two games in the same very small bucket of "cyberpunk hacker card games". there are very few games in this bucket. i can't imagine why one wouldn't draw comparisons between the two. legends of andor is a LOT farther away from Magic the Gathering than these two games. One is a board game, one is a card game; one is epic quests, one is dueling.
These two games, otoh, are both about cyberspace hackers fighting viruses by playing cards. There are very few other card games with this setting. They're both practically set in the same Gibson-inspired universe. The validity of comparing the two is obvious to me, just like people compare games about growing flowers that are radically different, or games about wine making that are radically different. The number of people who say "what should I get, calico or patchwork" because they're both about quilts is VERY high, and no one blinks an eye when people ask for comparisons.
This happens ALL THE TIME in the board gaming world. We put up Bark Avenue video the other day on the channel, and instantly people started asking "but how does it compare to Dog Park?" because they have the same theme... RADCIALLY different gameplay, but same theme.
No difference here.
And re: the "i'm known to like co-ops and dislike cutthroat games"... the majority of people who will end up watching this video are not subscribers of mine. A lot of people who watch it will have never seen one of my videos before. They don't know my preferences. So I'm making a statement: this is a cyberpunk card game about hacking viruses, like netrunner. I think this is a better game. A more fun game (imo). A fresher design (imo). A game with broader appealing gameplay. etc. etc. I stand by all of those statements, though all i said is "i would rather play this than netrunner" which is a statement of simple fact. in what universe should that be provocative?
Just here to show support. Both hubby and I didn't think this was a click bait at all. No clue why some are so triggered. Especially coming from you, we know a title like that wouldn't be a clickbait. That's just not you. We knew it only described your opinion about a game you now enjoy more than netrunner. Love your enthusiasm as always!
thank you, i really appreciate it. today was an incredibly tough day for my family, and all of this... didn't help. at first it was just kind of fun... a silly internet debate about the definition of the word "comparison", and thought exercises like comparing apples and oranges (literally) and at first it was letting me forget my troubles, but things started to turn nastier with accusations of impropriety and malice and whatnot. glad it seems to be mostly over now, and i really shouldn't take the bait (irony!) yeah, not sure why this is such a hot button topic for some folks... someone on facebook did tell me "netrunner fans take their game VERY seriously"... i guess i just didn't realize how much :(
hi there. if you're a netrunner fan and you're upset because i said that i like this hyperspace virus hacking card game more than your preferred hyperspace virus hacking card game, and you feel i misled you into watching a "useless video" for a few minutes, let me suggest a potential use case:
let's say at some point in the near future, you might find yourself playing netrunner with someone, and you might ask them "what other games do you like" and they might say "oh, i really like pandemic" or "oh, i really like hanabi" or "oh, i really like gloomhaven" or "oh, i really like solo games"
well you're in luck! you can tell them about this hyperspace virus hacking card game you recently heard about and maybe they'd like to check it out. Boom, useful video content, germane to your gaming tastes. Huzzah!
anyway, it's just a suggestion... happy running and stay rezzed! ;-)
Sorry, I couldn't hear you over the part where it's paid promotion.
If it's similar, say it's similar, but don't ride the coattails of one of the best games of all time for clicks.
@@DogStarGamingGR so what, because you think netrunner is one of the greatest games of all time, i'm not allowed to like a game better than it? that''s not how personal preference works tbh. but the fact that you're inclined to dismiss me and my point out of hand i think says more about you than me, but you gotta do you, i reckon! as i said above, keep running! :)
@@rahdo *paid* preference.
About something only similar on a topical level.
It's like comparing Philadelphia to Jury Duty because they're both courtroom movies.
@@DogStarGamingGR why not? let's do that comparison!
customer:
"hi there! i really like courtroom movies. what do you recommend"
blockbuster employee:
"well, what do you feel like tonight? maybe philadelphia? it's got academy award winning performances and is a powerful drama about the fight around gay rights. but bear in mind, it's heavy. it will make you cry, but it also lifts the soul.
otoh, if you're looking for a silly good time, maybe jury duty. it's a dumb screwball comedy, it certainly wont win any awards. but it's interesting that it focuses more on the jury side of the court battle rather than they lawyer side, which is kind of unique.
me, i tend to enjoy dumb comedies, so i'd watch jury duty (gasp!)"
and end scene. somehow, i've managed to compare two different things about the same topic, and reveal things about both. it's almost like the word comparison means "a consideration or estimate of the similarities or dissimilarities between two things" and it's something people do all the time :)
hehe, had to come back to report that literally the next comment I'm going through in my morning channel check routine was somebody comparing furnace against london, as if to prove my point that people compare radically different games with similar themes ALL THE TIME :)
Funny Rahdo, a lot of people are upset at you for comparing Netrunner to this game, I otoh, clicked on the video looking for a comparison, and unless I missed it, never even heard you mention Netrunner (except in the title). Oh well, still love the channel Rahdo, and your responses.
Yep, it's funny. I didn't actually make the reference in the video but I would have if it had occurred to me at the time (remember this was an excerpt from an hour-long video and I talked about it near the end of that video because it rated so high).
When posting I always try to get some little half-sentence blurb for these "rapid reviews" to make them stand out from my normal runthroughs for the regular vierwers, (and also just to have a little fun, hence the jokey gasp!) and so that the audience has some idea of what to expect in the video. And since this is a cyberpunk virus hacking card game, it just made sense to me to let folks know I'm talking about exactly that, and there's no better reference point in the industry the netrunner. Go figure :-)
Looking through the comments, I get that there's no reason why you shouldn't compare the two games given that they share a theme. The issue is, did you? You included in the title that you'd play this over Netrunner but never once in the video did you do an actual comparison. Had you explained in the video more on why you preferred one over the other I feel you'd have received much less blowback than you did. Perhaps you like co-op games more than 1v1 duels, perhaps you felt this game provided a greater level of thematic immersion than Netrunner, whatever, anything to that effect.
But you didn't, you dropped a very spicy take in the title and then kinda proceeded to walk away. I'm sure as a content creator you're not unaware of how your comments might be interpreted. So all this feels like a you're just being deliberately provocative, stepping on something a lot of people love in order to gain clicks for your video. I must say it is disappointing.
i don't think me saying I like X over Y is particularly provocative. if, in 1977, i had said "i like star wars more than star trek", i don't think anyone would have a problem with that, so not sure why the exact same type of comparison in 2022 is such a big deal, but i guess that's what the internet is all about :)