by JrStrange
Roger_Jay wrote:
You really have a strange way of reviewing games.... (after that one)
To say that there is no replay value in Abalone is like saying that there is no replay value in Reversi.
I have played many games of Abalone and they rarely ended in stalemate. There is a lot of replayability and strategy in Abalone, you just did not bother finding out about them and base your judgment on hearsay.
As for you "malus" of 35, why bother rating different aspects of the game separately if it is to rate it again and differently at the end? It really does not make any sense.
Scoring of that review: 3, Malus -2: 1/10.
~J
PS: and having your girlfriend liking your review is a bitpathetic incongruous (that's the word I was looking for...)
Edit: fixed link
To say that there is no replay value in Abalone is like saying that there is no replay value in Reversi.
I have played many games of Abalone and they rarely ended in stalemate. There is a lot of replayability and strategy in Abalone, you just did not bother finding out about them and base your judgment on hearsay.
As for you "malus" of 35, why bother rating different aspects of the game separately if it is to rate it again and differently at the end? It really does not make any sense.
Scoring of that review: 3, Malus -2: 1/10.
~J
PS: and having your girlfriend liking your review is a bit
Edit: fixed link
In a comment to my review of Agricola I stated:
The bonus section is (as are all board game rating systems) completely arbitrary. It's the section that I used to modify the score that I feel the game deserves by my estimation.
I see that some people find flaw in my rating system, but to these people I will reiterate what I've said before: This system, along with anyone else's, is entirely down to personal decisions regarding what makes a game good or bad by your own estimation.
It's flattering that you're displaying a little jealous towards my girlfriend, but it's also a little embarrassing. Ha ha.
Thanks for your input.