milomilo122
"I'm the Designer. I go back and forth.
On the one hand:
I've been designing abstract games for about 20 years, and I don't think I've designed a game with more hidden-but-discoverable subtleties than Blooms. If I had to pick one of my games to be the only game I played for the rest of my life, it would be this one.
On the surface it's Go-like, but after you've developed some understanding, you see it's its own thing, with major strategies that don't overlap.
But that's not obvious at first.
On the other hand:
In an age where players don't have a lot of energy to uncover veiled things, most of the game remains hidden to all but a tiny few. Most of the people in the world who have the patience and dedication for a game like this already play Go or Chess.
As a result, most people, even abstract game enthusiasts, fail to grasp many elements of even basic strategy, without which the experience falls flat.
In addition, tiny differences in skill lead to large, lopsided differences in outcomes. There are a lot of skill levels for the game. That's great for competitive play, but not so great for casual play.
All this makes me feel schizophrenic in my judgement.
If I'm judging it according to my standards for combinatorial game design, I'd give it a 10. (I've only given a 10 to one other game in my whole life).
On the other hand, if I'm judging according to the standards of your average board game enthusiast, I'd give it a 5.
Since I'm a connoisseur of these games, I'll go with the 10, but if you're not a connoisseur, I think there's a good chance you won't like it."
https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/249 ... ms/ratings
