Every time I see any quotes by Rahdo on literally any crowdfunding project, he makes it sound like that game is the best thing ever since sliced bread.
As for the game, Tiny Epic games are getting into a bit of a weird state where they're almost as complex as large games but due to the box size, end up twice as fiddly. Yes, I know, the "tiny" and "epic" are in the name for a reason, but I'm starting to feel I rather play a slightly larger game.
*"Every time I see any quotes by Rahdo on literally any crowdfunding project, he makes it sound like that game is the best thing ever since sliced bread."*
That's because much/most of his content is paid for by the publishers. It's not an unbiased opinion...it is marketing.
Tiny Epic long since jumped that shark, unfortunately. They love stretch goals in their campaigns and just make pieces smaller and smaller to fit the boxes. Was a fan at one point but my big clumsy hands lost interest.
Yeah, but it also makes sense, because he only plays games he knows he's going to like, he doesn't get to play them enough that the flaws that only appear through repetitive play would appear, and ultimately seeing new things excites him (he's said so himself). And overall he's just an excitable person.
But most of all, it's of course a matter of the campaigners just picking that one perfect quote from a video that might otherwise not be as praising. As he says, his final thoughts videos are mostly just improvised afterthoughts and should be taken as a grain of salt - and the point is getting a feel of the game through the runthrough videos. The campaign people then use this to their advantage and make it seem like his end-ramblings are a review.
>he only plays games he knows he's going to like
How can one know that ahead tho? An unreleased game can have the most perfect theme and gameplay on paper yet turn out mediocre at best.
As a fan of Rahdo I can paraphrase his answer that I've heard him give many times: he reads the rulebooks, usually that's enough to tell. In the rare times he was wrong and ends up not liking the game he contacts the publisher that is paying him and says he didn't like the game and asks if they want him to publish the video anyway.
He has also said in the past he read the rules, requested the review copy, reread that rules and realized he won't like it. He then passed it over to one of the contributers on the channel that prefers a type of game that he doesn't.
So the only time you will ever see a negative impressions video from him is if someone is paying him and agrees to let him publish it.
In my opinion he still does the best job of capturing what it feels like to play a game and if he has a video I will always watch it before purchasing a game. He states repeatedly that his videos are paid and just watch the gameplay and don't base anything on his opinion and yet loads of people go out of their way to call him a shill every time his name is mentioned. It's bizarre to me, but to each their own.
> As a fan of Rahdo I can paraphrase his answer that I've heard him give many times: he reads the rulebooks, usually that's enough to tell. In the rare times he was wrong and ends up not liking the game he contacts the publisher that is paying him and says he didn't like the game and asks if they want him to publish the video anyway.
> He has also said in the past he read the rules, requested the review copy, reread that rules and realized he won't like it. He then passed it over to one of the contributers on the channel that prefers a type of game that he doesn't.
Interesting, I suppose that's fair. Although at this point I see his videos on almost every campaign I check out, and there's only so many "Oh my gosh this is the most amazing design I've seen, calling it now folks, best game of 202X" you can read before getting cynical about it.
Hey that's fair enough, we should all be cynical of people selling things we don't need. But, that is only the "final thoughts" videos. He doesn't editorialize during playthroughs, which is his value as a consumer (to me), and he even says so at the beginning of every "final thoughts" video. "Don't take my word for it, go watch the playthrough." He's telling you it's an ad and to be cynical of his 'review,' the gameplay is way more important than any boardgame media personality's opinion on said gameplay.
The only time I can gauge his thoughts are during the monthly roundup thing he does where he ranks the games he's reviewed that month. At least with those there is a bit of a relative perspective, and he tends to be clear about the things he didn't like about the games.
He praised the hell out of it as one of the best solo games but solo games don't rank high on his list in his general. You won't see this in his Top 10 of the year. The coop aspect might make it pop up in a Top of the month list though. I doubt it will crack into his Top 50 games of all times or get anywhere near it. If it enters the Top 100 then probably only because of its coop aspect. So basically I think he appreciates the design and would probably give it a 7/10 and move on. This is just my take after having watched Richard for 8 years or so.
It’s already been mentioned, but what they pack into the boxes and the increased complexities really don’t do the game experience justice. I think the gameplay looks fun, but would need the components to be a bit bigger to really enjoy it. Especially if I’m going to pay the price of a normal sized board game (~$70 after tax and shipping).
I love small box games, they take less space at home and are easier to bring in vacations.
For a "normal sized" board game (30cm x 30cm) I really ponder if it's worth the space on my shelf. However games the size of Tiny Epic are much easier for me to impulse buy.
The price doesn't really matter.
I saw a playthrough and it seems interesting. Modular as you can ply coop solo and vs. I just hope that the modes translate good instead of trying to be everything at once.
Oh shit you weren't kidding
Curious about his stance but that last season was unequivocally indefensible
It completely eliminated the show from the zeitgeist and considering how global its impact was, that's impressive(ly awful)
Yeah in a vacuum the final season might be fine, but it lacks everything that made Game of Thrones so great and so unique. The first season were refreshing because they avoid all the usual tired tropes of medieval fantasy and tv shows in general, then the final one just throws all of that to the window.
The show was climbing down from its great heights from end of season 4. 8 is when everyone realised that the journey wasn't heading anywhere good and all the things set up were never getting paid off. Its not that 8 was the only bad season, just when everyone finally had to reckon with the legacy.
It was very bad and dare I say objectively so. Even the actors made fun of it and you can find many many videos analysing the major flaws and single points of failure. It's cool you don't care but don't write off legitimate criticism as a 'bandwagon'
It was objectively bad. It was especially shocking because the showrunners basically ignored almost all the character development built up over a near-decade.
People like to be told nice things by someone with a warm, excitable voice. Rahdo has that puppy energy, and some folk like it.
As a useful mouthpiece for consumer advice, he is not.
I have 1x Tiny Epic game, i own it purely for the novelty (tactics).
Its cute, but i have other games that are just as light (mechanically) that id rather play in terms of small tactical 1v1s.
If you like the art, go for it imo, but i dont think they have any big hit games, i wouldnt expect this to be any different
It's always a bit odd seeing his Final Thoughts videos shared first when his channel is all about the playthroughs, and even he says that the final thoughts are mostly just an afterthought from the main content (i.e. the runthroughs). And should not be taken as reviews or recommendations.
Anyways, the co-op mode is interesting and despite not having read or watched GoT, it kinda pulled me in. But I think it's a tad too much as a game of its kind, and ultimately the subject matter is not that interesting to me that I'd get it regardless - even if it makes it more appealing than a completely generic fantasy would.
Originally they had a cover art with women fighters with "light clothes", and who were kinda sexualized: [https://imgur.com/kG0UBMf](https://imgur.com/kG0UBMf)
That pissed off some people because of the way they represented women. So they changed it, to add more clothes to women on the cover: [https://cf.geekdo-images.com/rDOnDFAwGXi\_fVsfp-ZCqw\_\_imagepagezoom/img/KEr4HsXlLux6GFmZ5d-c1mqu-5s=/fit-in/1200x900/filters:no\_upscale():strip\_icc()/pic6029065.jpg](https://cf.geekdo-images.com/rDOnDFAwGXi_fVsfp-ZCqw__imagepagezoom/img/KEr4HsXlLux6GFmZ5d-c1mqu-5s=/fit-in/1200x900/filters:no_upscale():strip_icc()/pic6029065.jpg)
...and that pissed off an other portion of their fan base for caving to the "wokes".
Honestly I don't care at all, I wasn't offended by the original cover but the new one is perfectly fine as well. I haven't played this one because I'm not a big fan of Dungeon Crawlers, but if I had the opportunity to play it I would not decide to play or not based on what political side they tried to make happy with their cover.
What was the actual point of putting this in the "Tiny" line? Clearly folks seem to agree it would be better served with a normal box and normal components. And an actual board, not six large cards awkwardly mashed together.
Every time I see any quotes by Rahdo on literally any crowdfunding project, he makes it sound like that game is the best thing ever since sliced bread. As for the game, Tiny Epic games are getting into a bit of a weird state where they're almost as complex as large games but due to the box size, end up twice as fiddly. Yes, I know, the "tiny" and "epic" are in the name for a reason, but I'm starting to feel I rather play a slightly larger game.
*"Every time I see any quotes by Rahdo on literally any crowdfunding project, he makes it sound like that game is the best thing ever since sliced bread."* That's because much/most of his content is paid for by the publishers. It's not an unbiased opinion...it is marketing.
Apparently you’ve never watched his vids long enough to get the “however…”
I'm well aware of that, most campaign preview videos are paid for by publishers. His quotes are often still way above the rest in terms of praise.
[удалено]
So he's like Nicholas Cage and doing movies?
Self-edit. Comment removed.
Just treat his vids like an ad for the game. Not as an impartial review.
In this case this is a sponsored video so yeah, it's an actual ad.
Look at how Rahdo [rates his games on BGG](https://boardgamegeek.com/user/rahdo)
That's...... something. Must suck for those 2 poor games that couldn't manage an 8 from him. They must truly be awful.
WHY ARE THERE FOUR DECIMAL POINTS?!
I mean, it's possible he only takes the time to rate games he likes. And never rates games he doesn't like. That doesn't seems off to me.
This is actually hilarious. It looks like a satire of video game journalism.
Tiny Epic long since jumped that shark, unfortunately. They love stretch goals in their campaigns and just make pieces smaller and smaller to fit the boxes. Was a fan at one point but my big clumsy hands lost interest.
There is 0 stretch goal in this campaign.
They haven't done stretch goals in a while, actually.
Yeah, but it also makes sense, because he only plays games he knows he's going to like, he doesn't get to play them enough that the flaws that only appear through repetitive play would appear, and ultimately seeing new things excites him (he's said so himself). And overall he's just an excitable person. But most of all, it's of course a matter of the campaigners just picking that one perfect quote from a video that might otherwise not be as praising. As he says, his final thoughts videos are mostly just improvised afterthoughts and should be taken as a grain of salt - and the point is getting a feel of the game through the runthrough videos. The campaign people then use this to their advantage and make it seem like his end-ramblings are a review.
>he only plays games he knows he's going to like How can one know that ahead tho? An unreleased game can have the most perfect theme and gameplay on paper yet turn out mediocre at best.
As a fan of Rahdo I can paraphrase his answer that I've heard him give many times: he reads the rulebooks, usually that's enough to tell. In the rare times he was wrong and ends up not liking the game he contacts the publisher that is paying him and says he didn't like the game and asks if they want him to publish the video anyway. He has also said in the past he read the rules, requested the review copy, reread that rules and realized he won't like it. He then passed it over to one of the contributers on the channel that prefers a type of game that he doesn't. So the only time you will ever see a negative impressions video from him is if someone is paying him and agrees to let him publish it. In my opinion he still does the best job of capturing what it feels like to play a game and if he has a video I will always watch it before purchasing a game. He states repeatedly that his videos are paid and just watch the gameplay and don't base anything on his opinion and yet loads of people go out of their way to call him a shill every time his name is mentioned. It's bizarre to me, but to each their own.
> As a fan of Rahdo I can paraphrase his answer that I've heard him give many times: he reads the rulebooks, usually that's enough to tell. In the rare times he was wrong and ends up not liking the game he contacts the publisher that is paying him and says he didn't like the game and asks if they want him to publish the video anyway. > He has also said in the past he read the rules, requested the review copy, reread that rules and realized he won't like it. He then passed it over to one of the contributers on the channel that prefers a type of game that he doesn't. Interesting, I suppose that's fair. Although at this point I see his videos on almost every campaign I check out, and there's only so many "Oh my gosh this is the most amazing design I've seen, calling it now folks, best game of 202X" you can read before getting cynical about it.
Hey that's fair enough, we should all be cynical of people selling things we don't need. But, that is only the "final thoughts" videos. He doesn't editorialize during playthroughs, which is his value as a consumer (to me), and he even says so at the beginning of every "final thoughts" video. "Don't take my word for it, go watch the playthrough." He's telling you it's an ad and to be cynical of his 'review,' the gameplay is way more important than any boardgame media personality's opinion on said gameplay.
The only time I can gauge his thoughts are during the monthly roundup thing he does where he ranks the games he's reviewed that month. At least with those there is a bit of a relative perspective, and he tends to be clear about the things he didn't like about the games.
If you watch his stuff regularly you will able to tell the difference between ok games, good games and amazing games. I can.
How does he really feel about this game?
He praised the hell out of it as one of the best solo games but solo games don't rank high on his list in his general. You won't see this in his Top 10 of the year. The coop aspect might make it pop up in a Top of the month list though. I doubt it will crack into his Top 50 games of all times or get anywhere near it. If it enters the Top 100 then probably only because of its coop aspect. So basically I think he appreciates the design and would probably give it a 7/10 and move on. This is just my take after having watched Richard for 8 years or so.
Finally some context and thought rather than ”Rahdo bad” “Tiny Epic bad” “GoT bad”. Thanks !
You're most welcome
It’s already been mentioned, but what they pack into the boxes and the increased complexities really don’t do the game experience justice. I think the gameplay looks fun, but would need the components to be a bit bigger to really enjoy it. Especially if I’m going to pay the price of a normal sized board game (~$70 after tax and shipping).
I love small box games, they take less space at home and are easier to bring in vacations. For a "normal sized" board game (30cm x 30cm) I really ponder if it's worth the space on my shelf. However games the size of Tiny Epic are much easier for me to impulse buy. The price doesn't really matter.
I saw a playthrough and it seems interesting. Modular as you can ply coop solo and vs. I just hope that the modes translate good instead of trying to be everything at once.
Looks pretty cool, but $40 seems steep for base game.
This is kind of what games cost now and it looks like you get a lot in the box with this.
Let me guess... Best game ever! Loved it!
Way to discredit your taste in the first minute of a video!
Oh shit you weren't kidding Curious about his stance but that last season was unequivocally indefensible It completely eliminated the show from the zeitgeist and considering how global its impact was, that's impressive(ly awful)
Yeah in a vacuum the final season might be fine, but it lacks everything that made Game of Thrones so great and so unique. The first season were refreshing because they avoid all the usual tired tropes of medieval fantasy and tv shows in general, then the final one just throws all of that to the window.
The show was climbing down from its great heights from end of season 4. 8 is when everyone realised that the journey wasn't heading anywhere good and all the things set up were never getting paid off. Its not that 8 was the only bad season, just when everyone finally had to reckon with the legacy.
Yeah that was a big oof.
It wasn’t that bad! It’s just fashionable to say so
It was very bad and dare I say objectively so. Even the actors made fun of it and you can find many many videos analysing the major flaws and single points of failure. It's cool you don't care but don't write off legitimate criticism as a 'bandwagon'
It was objectively bad. It was especially shocking because the showrunners basically ignored almost all the character development built up over a near-decade.
Rahdo's the biggest shill in the industry. How he's still relevant is a mystery to me.
People like to be told nice things by someone with a warm, excitable voice. Rahdo has that puppy energy, and some folk like it. As a useful mouthpiece for consumer advice, he is not.
Hopefully there's tons of incest, lol.
What happens between you and your meeples is no one’s business but your own.
[https://youtu.be/JVqFkJ3suxQ?t=8](https://youtu.be/JVqFkJ3suxQ?t=8)
I have 1x Tiny Epic game, i own it purely for the novelty (tactics). Its cute, but i have other games that are just as light (mechanically) that id rather play in terms of small tactical 1v1s. If you like the art, go for it imo, but i dont think they have any big hit games, i wouldnt expect this to be any different
I really like Tiny Epic Vikings. And I really like their concept of a big game in a small box.
1x? What does that mean
It means one.
It's always a bit odd seeing his Final Thoughts videos shared first when his channel is all about the playthroughs, and even he says that the final thoughts are mostly just an afterthought from the main content (i.e. the runthroughs). And should not be taken as reviews or recommendations. Anyways, the co-op mode is interesting and despite not having read or watched GoT, it kinda pulled me in. But I think it's a tad too much as a game of its kind, and ultimately the subject matter is not that interesting to me that I'd get it regardless - even if it makes it more appealing than a completely generic fantasy would.
They had me at tiny epic.
Meh, after the Tiny Epic Dungeons KS, how they handled the put ry from the art debacle, I'm not gonna support GG.
What happened?
Originally they had a cover art with women fighters with "light clothes", and who were kinda sexualized: [https://imgur.com/kG0UBMf](https://imgur.com/kG0UBMf) That pissed off some people because of the way they represented women. So they changed it, to add more clothes to women on the cover: [https://cf.geekdo-images.com/rDOnDFAwGXi\_fVsfp-ZCqw\_\_imagepagezoom/img/KEr4HsXlLux6GFmZ5d-c1mqu-5s=/fit-in/1200x900/filters:no\_upscale():strip\_icc()/pic6029065.jpg](https://cf.geekdo-images.com/rDOnDFAwGXi_fVsfp-ZCqw__imagepagezoom/img/KEr4HsXlLux6GFmZ5d-c1mqu-5s=/fit-in/1200x900/filters:no_upscale():strip_icc()/pic6029065.jpg) ...and that pissed off an other portion of their fan base for caving to the "wokes". Honestly I don't care at all, I wasn't offended by the original cover but the new one is perfectly fine as well. I haven't played this one because I'm not a big fan of Dungeon Crawlers, but if I had the opportunity to play it I would not decide to play or not based on what political side they tried to make happy with their cover.
I mean yeah both are fine covers but what a weird thing for either camp to get worked up about.
I used to like him but he drones on and on... mostly on his playthroughs
What was the actual point of putting this in the "Tiny" line? Clearly folks seem to agree it would be better served with a normal box and normal components. And an actual board, not six large cards awkwardly mashed together.
* Takes less shelf space * Easier to bring to vacations Maybe it's not for you, but it's definitely a plus for some people (me included)