I wonder if they would like Tactics better since it has a board, dice, and a PVP mechanic?
Yeah, but one of these days I’m going to run Ambuscade against the Argent Adept, Setback, and Tachyon to see if he can even beat them.
Setback would just do his thing and win because he's awesome.
That said, I have lost to Blade more than I would like to admit
Advanced Blade in either Atlantis or Rook City can be brutal. Okay, so yeah, pretty much any villain is brutal in Rook City. Atlantis can accelerate his card plays and trash with both the Throne and the Pillars.
I would argue that Voss' 'ten minions in play' loss is worse, because that presumably ends with Gene-Bound Humans rather than mere smashy death.
As for SU&SD, I think the Sentinels review may have been the first (and last) review of theirs I watched, and I came away with the impression that they were talentless hacks who really didn't understand games. Then I showed it to a friend of mine who doesn't like SotM, just in case I was reflexively defending something I loved, and he agreed that it was a terrible review that completely missed all possible criticisms of the game and why are these guys on Penny Arcade again?
"What do you get if you win? What do you get if you lose? Really the result of the game isn't a big deal."
You could say that about Minesweeper, or Solitaire, or Spider Solitaire, or all the variations. But those games continue to be popular.
Yeah. What do you get if you win Carcassonne, or Twilight Struggle, or My Little Pony: Hide and Seek?
You get to have won. That's what games are like, generally.
You said all that needs to be said. Just wanted to quote it for the truth that it is.
Non co-op games winning is special. Lose or win in full Co-op it doesn't really matter, because either everyone wins or everyone loses. In competetive games you are going against someone else whi is trying to win and you are trying to win but only one of you can.
It registers differently when you lose but someone else wins, or when you win at the expense of your friends.
In SotM the only thing that changes is the story. Without that story you might as well build a puzzle.
I think winning or losing totally does matter in Co-op games. I feel a sense of accomplishment when I beat one of the many villains in Sentinels of the Multiverse, some more so than others because of difficulty and what not.
I can agree that they do register differently, but not in the same way you do. I see one being as a team the end goal was achieved thanks to some excellent teamwork and a dash of luck, yay us! The other being bragging rights because of out-skilling, out-lucking, and possibly some trickery against the other players.
But the main end result to me that's truly important, is that I atleast enjoyed the last 30-60 minutes I spent playing SotM, whether it was a win or loss.
Yeah I learned in the second grade recess that I didn't like beating my friends at things. It registered differently for sure, it registered as "man, I just made my friend feel bad." That negative feeling was actually stronger than the positive from winning. I don't think thats too common but thats how it was for me.
I OFTEN feel similarly with games but it does depend on the game and who I'm playing with. For instance I know that most of the people in my gaming group are mature enough to not take it poorly when they loose so then I don't feel bad if I win. Though like wise by now I don't really feel good if I win either, its really more about the enjoyment of playing the game. You know, all about the journey rather than the destination and all that.
I agree with you when criticism is defined as " the expression of disapproval of someone or something based on perceived faults or mistakes." There isn't much good in that. However, I'm quite in favor of " the analysis and judgment of the merits and faults of a literary or artistic work" (both definitions obtained from Google). It's because of criticism such as this that I was exposed to Sentinels of the Multiverse.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/features/9238-2011-Holiday-Buyers-Guide.4
It's only a paragraph, but it told me all I needed to hear to put it on my Christmas wish list. Cooperative super hero card game with tons of replay value and varied tactics across ten heroes, four villains, and four environments. Those things sounded fun to me. If it was just "This is a game! I like it! Ask for it for Christmas," then I probably wouldn't be on these forums today talking about my favorite game. I like positive criticism as much as the next guy, but there is value in negative criticism, as we're not all wired the same. A co-op super hero experience may sound like a complete nightmare for a lot of players, but we all already know this game is a dream come true for a lot of gamers all around.
I'm all for criticism that provides impressive conveyance, clear description, and informed interpretation. If I saw SU & SD's review first I'd hope that I would do a bit more research on Sentinels before forgetting about it due to their vague analysis. But if I saw it on a bad day? Man…I don't wanna know what that part of the multiverse looks like…
EDIT: @Sefirit: I totally understand being disappointed with a win against your friends. I hated winning when it bummed out my friends, and I was bummed out when I lost. It was a huge drag. Sentinels was the perfect game to scratch that itch I didn't even knew I had.
This is my point. You enjoy playing the game. A lot of people play games for the competition, the risk of losing and winning and the emotions that evokes.
If you have fun when you lose, and have fun when you win you greatly reduce the difference in outcomes.
For players that go for that rush Sentinels is going to be unfulfilling.
I think the problem with the SU&SD review is that they don't realize that they have that bias. The realy cool parts of the game fail to be really cool to them, because they cannot give them the fix that a "good game" can give. Therefore every aspect of the game is seen through the lense that the game failed on the most basic level, it failed to live up to the entire reason they play games.
Those of us who would rather enjoy the story, the theme, and spending time with cool people trying to pull off cool stuff where no one is required to lose find Sentinels to be awesome. That is exactly what it offers, and it delivers in a big way.
This kind of conveyance is fantastic. It expresses the strengths of this game for gamers that appreciate the co-op experience while acknowledging players that thrive on competition and a physical "winner" and "loser" without lionizing or demonizing either party.
Drop the mic, phantaskippy…you just criticized SotM like a boss.
THIS
One of the odder things in a current game concerning that topic is Marvel Legendary DB. If the hero or villain deck win out, it's consider a draw.
A draw against… who? It's (mostly) a co-op against the game. Who are you drawing with?
Legendary is not a draw, it's a loss for the players and a win for the evil mastermind you were facing (i.e. the game)
EDIT: No, you're right, it is a draw if the decks run out, it's only a win for evil if they complete their scheme, another rule I have been playing wrong!