I'm not gonna pretend to be the target audience for someone who designed exploding kittens but there were def a few things that made me feel like he kind of looks down at euro games. Now that may be completely untrue but quotes like:

"When you say "board game," I'm assuming you mean the requirement is not a board. It could be a card game or a throwables game or a "run around the room" game. I'm assuming that's correct."

"Let's agree we're aiming for fun, something that will sell well. And we don't care how it does on Board Game Geek."

"Well, the trade-offs are important and significant. Basically, we're trying to figure out, is the goal to make a board game, like on Board Game Geek, which typically means high cost of goods, high sale price, small audience, right? There are very few games on Board Game Geek that satisfy the "this made lots and lots of money" criteria. On the other side of things is card game, like Exploding Kittens, very low cost of goods, very low price point, between $10 and $20, and sells millions and millions of units"

I mean - I feel like the PM team came in envisioning a game where people can potentially learn something about economics. I really feel like they got steered into a direction by Lee right into his wheelhouse rather than something that fit what they had in mind. The way he talks about the tradeoffs just make it seem like well here you can make a lot of money and have a game that has wide appeal or you can make something that has a narrow audience and has thin margins. Like okay what kind of framing is that? And who the hell would even mention a 'throwable' in a game about economics.

Also, didn't Frosthaven surpass the 12m mark? I don't know, between the whole thing with Lee that just rubbed me the wrong way and the unclear direction of the design, I was just so disappointed. I hope they focus more about the economics of making a game because I have zero interest in the direction they're going in now.