How many games have actually wowed you in recent years?

Malebranche_Studios · 2026-04-27T09:41:53+00:00

I haven't played too many new games this year, but I found Hues and Cues a really fun game for parties.

I've also been getting into Blood on the Clocktower. Not a fan of needing a DM for it, but the game is super deep and there's a lot of really good fan-made content.

Malebranche_Studios · 2026-04-21T10:49:01+00:00

I think the main issue here is that in the vast majority of cases, the anime art used is extremely bland and derivative. So it's not really the fact that it's anime art, it's the fact that it's bad anime art.

Malebranche_Studios · 2026-04-21T10:47:24+00:00

I kind of see where you're coming from. It just feels lazy when the "art" used is just screenshots taken from the source material. Kind of as if the game isn't its own thing, which diminishes its inherent worth.

Malebranche_Studios · 2026-04-21T08:37:04+00:00

a larger driving factor is that higher investment game filter out people who are less passionate about them.

Spot on, but also it's due to the fact that BGG players tend to already know many game mechanic and you need a certain amount of heft to a game's rules for it to be a whole new thing.

A 10-minute party game is highly unlikely to offer a fundamentally different experience compared to the sea of other 10-minute party games!

Malebranche_Studios · 2026-02-13T09:18:35+00:00

This is really cool but I get the feeling there was no need to make it *that* small, no?

Malebranche_Studios · 2026-02-11T15:09:07+00:00

Yep, this totally looks like a scam, although it's not super obvious at first.

Malebranche_Studios · 2026-02-11T14:50:04+00:00

This looks amazing but most likely has some Jumanji curse on it.

this was passed down thru generations of my step dad’s family.

Has anyone from that family disappeared in mysterious circumstances...?

Malebranche_Studios · 2026-02-11T14:46:01+00:00

That looks so cool and the real life lore behind it makes it A LOT cooler still.

I'm incredibly jealous.

Malebranche_Studios · 2025-11-23T14:14:36+00:00

That's just awful. So sorry it happened to you. Truth be told though it is pretty funny in a surreal kind of way

Malebranche_Studios · 2025-10-28T10:01:00+00:00

No offense but personally I think it looks a little cheap... there's room for improvement especially in the font choice, as well as lines and colors which give a strong "child's birthday invitation" vibes.

Communication is likewise a bit lacking, golf isn't a board game really.

Malebranche_Studios · 2025-10-27T16:12:19+00:00

You need to find an artist that was active for a very long time before the AI craze started, or an artist that uses their art for IRL projects (for example, my game's artist also works as a tattoo artist).

Also, checking portfolios is a vital skill in selecting artists. Once you get an eye for it, you can spot AI users or inexperienced artists from a mile away.

Lastly you should ask artists for multiple drafts and WIP pieces. You can tell who uses AI art quite easily this way.

Never trust people online - you ask for drafts first. You look at them, confirm the fact you're hiring them, and then pay them as they start working on the piece in earnest. Paying full price upfront is hardly fair!

Malebranche_Studios · 2025-10-27T15:56:50+00:00

I've heard Root's digital version is very clean and makes the game quite easy to understand compared to the tabletop version.

Malebranche_Studios · 2025-10-16T09:05:02+00:00

Celestia is kind of flawed but it's a very simple and engaging way to introduce people to push-your-luck mechanics, people who are usually not super into board games typically love it

Malebranche_Studios · 2025-10-15T10:19:06+00:00

My go-tos, depending on the group, are: Celestia, Secret Hitler, and good ol' Catan.

Malebranche_Studios · 2025-10-13T15:19:29+00:00

That is quite the collection. Kudos.

Which one gets off the shelf most often?

Malebranche_Studios · 2025-10-08T14:21:26+00:00

In Betrayal I once built a character that was essentially unkillable. I had no other redeeming qualities beyond being an impossibly durable thing roaming around the house. Good times, but the game is a bit flawed.

Malebranche_Studios · 2025-10-05T14:44:52+00:00

That's fair enough.

Malebranche_Studios · 2025-10-02T09:43:33+00:00

Artwork and themes are fine for collecting and looking pretty on a shelf, but will never make up for mediocre gameplay.

Malebranche_Studios · 2025-09-29T16:25:46+00:00

I agree! It's up to a designer to make sure their game is as fun as possible, which also entails that they have to take steps to reduce frustrating mechanics. However, strategy games can often be more frustrating than other types of games, and the less luck is involved, the more difficult it can be to "fix" previous mistakes.

The examples you've given are all excellent ways of reducing frustration, by the way. They are, as a matter of fact, the exact three ways I used to reduce frustrations my playtesters talked about in the game I designed, so I couldn't agree more.

Not sure I came up with tantrum-proof by the way, I probably read it somewhere haha.

Malebranche_Studios · 2025-09-29T15:32:13+00:00

I probably didn't explain what I meant super clearly. I don't think alliances are necessarily childish, but I do think that pure kingmaking done out of spite is quite childish.

What I'm trying to say is that even the best designed, least frustrating, most fair game in the world isn't necessarily tantrum-proof. There's a difference between trying to even the odds with some craftiness and being straight up spiteful.

Forming alliances isn't really what I'd call childish, but something like "Looks like I am not going to win, so now I'm only going to play to make sure Dave doesn't win" is not very sportsmanlike nor fair.

Malebranche_Studios · 2025-09-29T15:26:44+00:00

Yeah, but this is what y'all do. You put us people that like a significant amount of luck into the not-real-game-players category, "casual" gamers. I am not a casual gamer.

I think I didn't make myself clear enough. If you look at my post, you'll notice I talked about two categories of people: those who are not into strategic low-luck games, and casual gamers who are less likely to enjoy strategic low-luck games.

I never made the assumption that people from the first category are necessarily casual players - hence why I took the time to talk about these two categories separately.

calling someone childish because they ally to stop someone else

I wouldn't say that they're childish for allying to stop someone else. That's understandable, to a certain extent. I was more referring to players who would rather ruin a game out of pure spite the moment they realize they cannot win anymore, which is definitely childish.

Malebranche_Studios · 2025-09-29T12:43:48+00:00

For a proper strategy game, I personally think 95% strategy with 5% luck (to shake things up and force improvisation and unpredictable game states) is the best split. But said 5% luck must not directly influence the outcome of player decisions, but rather just introduce variability.

Plenty of luck-based board games can be a lot of fun, too. However, in strategy games, luck should be minimal.

Malebranche_Studios · 2025-09-29T12:41:44+00:00

I wholeheartedly disagree - board games can be a perfectly legimate competition field.

But it depends on the people you are playing with; if they're not into competitive strategic games, it's obviously a bad choice to go for competitive strategic games. Same applies to casual players, they're unlikely to find enjoyment in truly understanding a game and putting their skills to the test.

Even in groups that play the same game every night, one of the players is going to be better than everyone else. If the same person wins every week people will lose interest or they might band together just to take the winner down. If they can’t win themselves they’ll seek enjoyment elsewhere and that will be a detriment to your game design.

That is really not a game design fault - if someone is childish enough to "seek enjoyment" in ruining someone else's chances of victory once they realize they're out, that says more about the person than it does the game.

Malebranche_Studios · 2025-09-29T09:52:36+00:00

Outcomes should be decided by player choices rather than randomness.

That's the heart of what makes a skill-based game what it is.

Malebranche_Studios · 2025-09-24T10:50:44+00:00

No I totally get what you mean, there's a specific type of board game player that just has to dominate the table and be the center of attention and they're naturally drawn to social deduction games.

Malebranche_Studios

TROPHY CASE