Warhammer 3e Demo Experiences -OR- How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bits

[Rykion]

Here's a link to the actual ICv2 review since I didn't notice a link in this thread: ICv2 - Review of 'Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay'

There is no mention of gameplay at all in this "review." It doesn't indicate the reviewer has actually played the game. There really isn't anything that even indicates that the author read the entire game. It incorrectly states the character cards replace character sheets. It's entirely opinion without any information to illustrate the author's view beyond the game's price and the boardgame components. I would be upset with this review both as the company that made the game, and as the website that published the review.

I haven't played the game, or decided to buy it or not. That review didn't help me make any kind of decision.

 

[La Bete]

I have to agree with his main point though that the reviewer has not played the game. I find such reviews worthless. It would be tantamount to a movie reviewer seeing the trailer and writing his review.

The editors response is very interesting. To aggressively summarise (as others have above), "yes we should have disclosed conflict-of-interest and yes it was a bit content free, oops we'll try to do better."

Relevant sections:

"As to whether Bodden's relationships with the previous versions of WHFRP should have been disclosed, yes, it would have been better had that information been included with the review, and we'll be more careful to include that kind of background information in the future"

And

"With regard to the content of the review, we'll grant that there's less in the review about gameplay than in most game reviews we run (mostly by the same writer as this one), but we do find the review to be a generally good summation of the reactions some will have to the game"

ICv2 - Christian Petersen, CEO of Fantasy Flight Games, on WFRP Review

 

[Saint&Sinner]

I found it fun to play and easy to run as a GM (other than making a commitment to getting all the materials to the play-space). The game will be a lot more fun when its more complete (full list of basic and core advanced careers, all the types of wizards and priests).


It doesn't go far enough though in the social sphere. I'll have to hack in some elements to make that as fun as the combat. A shame really since without the ability to make the cards my contributions are going to look a little shabby...

 

[OchreJelly]

Thanks for all the demo reports. I was pretty neutral about this game, but hearing some of these positive demo reports has piqued my interest. I always tend to keep an open mind when it comes to games / mechanics.

The way I see it, if WFRP's dice system was what DND used for 20 years, and then 4E suddenly introduced a D20, some people would talk about how the D20 "breaks immersion" and all that just the same. Gimmist bits / concepts always get in the way until you get used to them.

I'm curious to hear more about the tactical play, like how the three distances are handled, how you can perform flanks etc. Most importantly, I'm curious as to how long a typical encounter takes, in real time. It sounds like it would move pretty quickly w/o the grid.

 

[AllisterH]

And he wasnt even very hard on it. I smell the stink of desperation. Someone should also tell the guy from FFG that theres nothing "innovative" about recycling mechanics from board games they have been putting out for years.

But that's the main argument from the FFG guys...

You don't even NEED miniatures and boards since the combat isnt tactical AT ALL a la 4e.

The packaging of the material is certainly different but from those that actually played it, it certainly isn't a board game.

It's a RPG that uses the bucketful of dice resolution sstem (still leaves me cold) and uses cards a la SAGA and 4e to track powers and conditions but there's no boardgame element I can see to it from the demo reports.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

I'll admit, the good reviews and, more importantly, mention of it still being a gritty game, have gotten my hopes up. While my finances certainly aren't at a level where I can drop close to a hundred bucks into a new game, I'll admit I'm more interested to see how this turns out.

As for the review bit...

CEO: You didn't even review the damn game!
Editor: No no, it was a review of the reviews! You just need to think more meta about it!

If I wanted that kinda crap, I'd go hang out with the students at the Academy of Art. If someone reviews a game, I expect a review of the game.

 

[DMfromdimensionX]

But that's the main argument from the FFG guys...

You don't even NEED miniatures and boards since the combat isnt tactical AT ALL a la 4e.

The packaging of the material is certainly different but from those that actually played it, it certainly isn't a board game.

It's a RPG that uses the bucketful of dice resolution sstem (still leaves me cold) and uses cards a la SAGA and 4e to track powers and conditions but there's no boardgame element I can see to it from the demo reports.

I meant the funny dice and cards. I dont see anything board gamey about it either. Makes me think more of magic and its ilk then a board game with all the cards.

What i took from the review was that it looked so bad he didnt want to play it. Its unprofessional but it does reflect what some people are gonna think when they open the box.

 

[Herremann the Wise]

And he wasnt even very hard on it. I smell the stink of desperation. Someone should also tell the guy from FFG that theres nothing "innovative" about recycling mechanics from board games they have been putting out for years.

Or it seems you want to smell the stink of desperation - or just stink in general perhaps? You are right that the review wasn't that poor - it was completely bland and completely uninformative to someone wishing to shell out the dollars for it (perhaps the intent of the reviewer)? I think as someone wheeling out their new flagship product, Clark had every right to be disgusted by the review, to the point of questioning the integrity of the reviewer. I imagine he would have swallowed a savagely poor but more detailed and informed and informative review rather than what effectively amounts to a disinterested glance at the box contents.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Or it seems you want to smell the stink of desperation - or just stink in general perhaps? You are right that the review wasn't that poor - it was completely bland and completely uninformative to someone wishing to shell out the dollars for it (perhaps the intent of the reviewer)? I think as someone wheeling out their new flagship product, Clark had every right to be disgusted by the review, to the point of questioning the integrity of the reviewer. I imagine he would have swallowed a savagely poor but more detailed and informed and informative review rather than what effectively amounts to a disinterested glance at the box contents.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

The review to me looked to me like something that could have been written 1 or 2 months ago, just by looking at the available promo photos and reading a few forum entries. As a reader I was disappointed that it didn't add any useful information.

Are there some more informative reviews out there? Or are those reviewers still too busy playing the game?

 

[delericho]

As for the review bit...

CEO: You didn't even review the damn game!
Editor: No no, it was a review of the reviews! You just need to think more meta about it!

If I wanted that kinda crap, I'd go hang out with the students at the Academy of Art. If someone reviews a game, I expect a review of the game.

Yeah, that review was completely worthless. Not only does he not talk about any actual gameplay experience (which, frankly, is a must in a review of this sort), but he doesn't even talk about his experiences when reading the rules - were they well laid out and easily explained? Or were they badly laid out and impossibly complex?

The FFG guys were right to be annoyed. The editors of ICv2 should have been similarly annoyed - it must surely be bad for the credibility of their site to post content-free and worthless reviews?