6 Games I Played so You Don’t Have To

[@ronthal]

Oak is really really neat. It's actually fairly easy to teach since the 4-5 cards in hand tell you at any time what actions you can do, and initially there are only 9 main actions you can chose from, using the 9 corresponding locations. You'll unlock alternative usage of those locations getting advanced cards. Early during the first game it might be a bit confusing but you quickly get it and then try to figure out how to optimize the use of your druids, special ones or not, and decide which upgrades you would favor. I really like that you score all points during the game, the moment you get an artifact or a creature or clumb up the tree etc. There is no endgame scoring at all ; it's a kind of point salad with a bit of interaction and racing element to get a bonus on what you're good at in the tree. You can still catch up and score loads in the last rounds by doing potions or anything else.

[@woundsdrone]

Agree with the people here who like Oak. Solid euro game with great, production. The iconography isn’t the easiest to grasp, but once you get it, I think Oak is brilliant.

[@victoriaghezei1129]

I really like Oak and people I played with also all like it, some of them more and some less, but all of them enjoyed it. I would like to know, what thinks others from Dice Tower, especially Chris and Mike...

[@spitmacabre]

For me Oak is one of the highlights of last year's Spiel. There were many games that were hyped and underdelivered much more in the end (Starship Captains, Lacrimosa, Deal with the Devil...)

[@matthewzahnzinger]

Eeep! I played Oak at GenCon, missed the campaign, but just picked up a Kickstarter copy from Boardlandia. Really enjoyed my initial play through, love the look of it, and REALLY hoping it hits better for me than it does for Tom. Agree with another commenter, would love to see how this landed with some of the rest of the Dice Tower crew.

[@Nemspy]

Oak was just outside my top 10 games of the year, so I can't agree with Tom here.

[@morgaknightgames]

I also really like Oak. It plays very well solo. Haven't had a chance to play at a higher player count yet, but I'd keep it just for solo alone. The icons are indeed a bit much on your first play, but I picked it up pretty quick game two. Hoping someone else at The Dice Tower gives it another go.

[@tehbige73]

I recently played time of empires and actually really enjoyed it. The combat has to be simple so that you can do it in real time, but its also tense and difficult to take control. The leaders can specialize you into different areas and I love how the timers simulate waiting to discover things like in civilization video games.

[@BoardGamesBricksHobbies]

The box also being the board in Moon Leap is a fun idea!

[@CharlesCom-bd2qb]

My two boardgames media I consume are DT and So Very Wrong about games and its very funny because SWAG really loved Time of Empires and Oak. I dont mind the opposite reaction (quite interesting in fact) but I would have like that both of them got dedicated video with the overview and the team discussion tho

[@roseability86]

I love Oak tbh. Glad to see I'm not alone. You're wrong, Tom!

[@antonj.2408]

I find Time of Empires actually very good. It really feels like a RTS in board game form. Everything runs smooth, with the actions being simple to reduce the chance of mistakes.

[@srpad]

I really like Oak.

[@pilotvc]

Oak looks amazing, but the reason I didn't back it was bc it looked over-produced and they were mainly selling the design and art, not the game itself. Still on my list but surprised it fell so flat for Tom.

[@mkitten13]

I agree about the iconography in Oak, it makes the entry harder than it has to be, but I felt far more in tune with the game itself on my second try (in my first game I got hung up on wishing I had the other player's board and did not really lean into the strength of my own chosen board - ironically the next time I played, I chose the same board I had played the first time because the set-up for that game made that board more enticing to go for). The production is really great, the game itself is more subtle in nature. I don't blame people who walk away underwhelmed or disappointed, because that was my first impression, then I played it again and I appreciated it a lot more.

[@georgia4708]

Yet another comment in favour of Oak! Surely not a 5! Would be nice to see what other reviewers thought about it. I personally would easily give it a 7.5-8, very good game.

[@skipmcilvaine]

Oak hit very well for us. Very surprised to see such a low rating. We'd give it an 8/10.

[@DoctorGarro]

Oak is a GREAT game. Hopefully someone else on the Dice Tower covers it, because I believe it’s WAY better than Tom thinks.

[@roseability86]

Agree 💯 I immediately wanted to play it again.

[@njanear]

Didn’t expect Oak to be on this list. I really like Oak. There is luck in almost every game but the is mitigation to the luck. So didn’t quite agree with that comment.

[@Montag451]

Surprised to see Oak on here. My group really enjoyed it. It's been a big hit for us. We regularly play heavy Euros (like Lacerda), so the iconography and remembering abilities weren't an issue for us. After the first game, it moved pretty smoothly.

[@soogymoogi]

I'd be interested to hear Chris's thoughts on it if he ends up playing it.

[@MeepleUniversity]

Its fair, not all all games for everyone right. But we also quite enjoying playing this game, enjoying the puzzle too. Iconography gets smoother too yes

[@TheSpizer]

Gonna agree with some other comments and say that my wife and I really enjoyed Oak. We didn’t find the iconography overwhelming and we enjoyed the different upgrades the game had beyond just the outfits.

[@fantasmilfilms100]

I have played Time of Empires, and I disagree with Tom on this game. I thought it was REALLY fun. I wasn't bored with it and actually thought the real time timer aspect of the game built great tension. It's not gonna be for everyone, but I'd give it 7 out of 10 stars. I'm excited to play it more! Love the Dice Tower Tom; you guys make fantastic gaming content :)

[@SmoothGummi]

This is the first in this series, (and perhaps the first time of any video) where I was truly surprised by Tom and disagreed this much. Oak is a really solid game. 10/10? No. But 5? No way. Yes there are a lot of icons, but there are plenty of games with that. I didn’t feel it took away from my experience. I really enjoyed the game and recommend it to anyone who likes worker placement. The upgrading of the Druids and of your action cards was really fun and having to pivot your strategy if someone goes where you wanted to on the board made for an engaging experience.

[@ArnieHorta]

I played this with my game group and I have to agree with Tom here. I found the iconography overwhelming and the only hook was the worker upgrading which I think was done better in games like Chimera Station. Oak was a pass for me.

[@SmoothGummi]

@@ArnieHorta it’s just interesting that he disliked the amount of iconography, but says that wayfarers of the south Tigris is no problem. They both have a ton of iconography. We really enjoyed the game.

[@ArnieHorta]

@@SmoothGummi I think that part of the difference is that the Wayfarer’s iconography is more consistent across Shem Philips games. If you learn it once it isn’t so hard to pick up afterwards. Now take this with a grain of salt…I have played all the West Kingdom games but I haven’t played Wayfarers yet…

[@CharlesCom-bd2qb]

For me, the first time I disagreed with Tom (also Sam and Zee were in the video), was the Spirit Island review lol. To be fair, I think Spirit Island is better at two or three who knows the game. But its by far my favorite ever / best co-op/ most thematic/ more replayed game lol and they really did not like it.

[@GlennDeBlock]

4 squares review of Oak please

[@eddieb8054]

Lol. I liked the music at the end better than the games… it’s stuck in my head.

[@chrissiestern9359]

I hope someone else from the Dice Tower reviews oak as well. I did not back it, but it sounds so interesting! I love worker placement but a game can be a dud if the actions aren't interesting.

[@petercsm5769]

I'm surprised Keepers made it out the door. The idea of Dixit but with much, much more straightforward cards seems like a terrible idea in concept alone. And I agree about Time of Empires. Nearly everyone expressed the same reservations but it's such a well-known and obvious problem with timer games in general we thought they would have accounted for it in the gameplay.

[@randallbarnes3488]

WHAT!? Time is Empires is really fun! Disagree with 5/10. It's at least a 7.

[@kumanight]

I probably would've backed Oak if the Stroganov campaign didn't leave such a bad taste

[@EfrainRiveraJunior]

Excatly.

[@Nemspy]

Stroganov had some production issues, but I don't think it's -that- bad. I enjoyed it as a game and would probably give it a 7.8/10. I actually thought Hippocrates had bigger problems, but it was still decent.

[@Montag451]

Stroganov is actually a really solid game, just the production was a total disaster. Pay deluxe costs for sloppy, retail-quality components? Terrible manufacturer.

[@radshef318]

Like many here I enjoy Oak but that first play when you're trying to get your head around the iconography is pretty rough and I do see it has flaws, though I forgive it a bit for the gorgeous art and some of the unique ways it approaches worker placement. I have the retail edition and whilst the majority of components are good and didn't make me feel I needed the Kickstarter version, the little rings you use on your player boards are terrible in the retail. Flimsy pieces of cardboard that are already wearing after only a few plays. I'll end up replacing them with something eventually.

[@trueslna]

Oak has a bit too much hype and production quality to not get maybe a second opinion or a review from other DT members. It looked amazing at Essen, and my friends who played it there immeadiately purchased a copy because they enjoyed it a lot.

[@mystemo1980]

We need one of these from Mike, Zee, Camilla etc. Very good though

[@richhutnik2477]

I want to play the Amish Tom Dice Tower review game. In it, everyone plays a version of Tom that looks Amish and they review games. :)

[@Sgrand80]

Looks like Tom is with me on the minority for once lol. Talking about oak

[@Oaklestat]

Thank you sir. Saving time and money

[@JJ_TheGreat]

6:40 Tom, I just think you don't like those kind of Euros. Just admit it, Oak is outside of your genre.

[@thedicetower]

What "kind" of euro? I won't admit it because I love tons of eurogames.

[@rb4551]

I found I really dislike any games where you cannot watch other player's turns and help correct mistakes as you go. Whats the worse play experience or one of the worse? A player who just dumps everything on the table fast without explaining what he just did. Well thats the same concept in these kind of games. And I know my friends or myself dont cheat on purpose but we do make mistakes every single games we play and these mistakes can be pretty impactful if uncaught....so it makes these sort of games where you cant monitor so pointless because the end result is just meaningless. I dumped Furnace because of that...its just too long if you monitor and just pointless if you dont. Its also fun for me to watch people play their turns.

[@paulleins7809]

Dead wrong about Oak. Great game.

[@patcon314]

Totally disagree with Tom's assessment of Oak.

[@tonygleeson8834]

Agreeing with most folks here tha Oak is better than Tom give sit credit. I agree that there's lots of icons, but after the 1st game they all clicked really well for me and were quite intuitive. I will say that we found that the game didn't really click until the 2nd play as the interactions between some cards and actions aren't readily apparent and you need to see them in action before you can fully appreciate them. It's a shame that the DT crew probably won't go back and give it a proper try (I understand that they only have so much time to play games and something has to give).

[@Crs9072]

Played Oak, and it was mediocre at best. There are so many better games around that I see no reason to play that game ever again. The druid customization idea might have sounded great on a paper, but in practice it doesn't work. They are really hard to differentiate, the effects are not interesting, and they are generally pain to fiddle with. The actions are annoying to play and remember. I want to take this action, oh wait, someone is already in that sector. There is the disjoint of actions and spots because the action is not printed on the board, but is on the cards. The tree is boring as it can be. Just move on up, get some resources and points in the end, whoppiduu! The only somewhat interesting idea is that if you pass earlier, you get more resource tokens, but that's about it. Edit. Come to think of it this might be more of a Game Brewer issue. Recently played Hippocrates, and that game was a beautiful looking oversized game with no arc or progression. The Palaces of Carrara was unbalanced mess. Stroganov was such a boring game I was done with it half way through the first game.

[@tammyschilling5362]

I wonder where these ratings come from. How come a game that is "not very fun at all" gets a 5? If it's not fun, isn't a fail and should get 0?

[@Sgrand80]

Depends on you but to me a zero is a game that mechanically is not playable and surprised it was published

[@dominickschroyens9927]

I wonder why Game Brewer gets these low ratings from Tom. I can understand you don’t like Rulebenders and there were some production issues with Stroganov (still an awesome game). But they have been producing solid euro’s for a while. Oak is a great game, played it with a lot of friends and they all enjoyed it. And it definitely does not belong on this list. Give it a few plays and a fair review. It seems like I am not the only one that feels this way when I look at the comments.

[@TheSpizer]

I agree. I think there is an implicit bias there which is too bad

[@davidfavre6145]

Sorry but Oak really deserves a review by some other members on the Dice Tower crew.

[@FemmeSensei]

I don't understand ANYONE who plays a game once and casts judgement on it. I've had great games have bad first impressions for me. I've had great first impressions that haven't withstood the test of time. Any game deserves more than one play with an open mind before casting judgement, ESPECIALLY when it's a big and involved game.

[@nathansutterfield]

I sort of agree with you but at the same time if you have played thousands and thousands of games- I think you have a much better ability to make a judgment call.

[@whytemeet]

Sounds like Oak was just Oakay.

[@cybergecko6472]

I am surprised I am the first here. Excited to see this video. Love you guys.

[@the1haaron]

I did some research, Tom. Your average rating for 5 of our games is 5.7, thanks to an 8 for Paris, our most accessible game, because for the others it never exceeds 5.5. The avarage BBG user rating for those games is 7.3. It's clear that our game tastes differ, and that you dislike iconography in a language-independent game, you apparently have a hard time with that every time. Maybe it would just be better for everyone if you just stopped playing our games? Just wondering. Rudy, Game Brewer

[@andrewburnett6215]

This is a terrible way for a company to respond to a poor review.

[@the1haaron]

@@andrewburnett6215 We don't normally respond to reviews. And this is not a statement from the company, but my personal reaction. But I don't see why I shouldn't communicate that I disagree with Tom Vassel's consistently negative reviews on all of our games, each time completely contrary to the opinions of other reviewers and players. I respect reviewers' opinions, but I wouldn't mind if Tom Vasel just ignored our games, since he never wants to give them a chance anyway and often doesn't play them enough to form a decent opinion. Reviewers like Tom Vasel have a large support base and underestimate the power of their words. I prefer reviewers who only publish positive reviews and just ignore bad experiences. Opinions on games are often nothing more than that, personal opinions of 1 person, but in the case of Tom Vasel, with far too much impact.

[@andrewburnett6215]

@@the1haaron And I'm sharing my personal opinion that I think it's really gross for someone to be discouraging negative reviews while signing using the company name in their signiture. The last thing we need is less negative reviews. I really like Rahdo but I sure as heck don't want every single reviewer to insist on staying that positive all the time. Give the viewers some credit that they know their own tastes well enough to make their own decisions. Your whining about Tom here impacts my opinion of Game Brewer a lot more than Tom's negative review did.

[@EfrainRiveraJunior]

I'm glad that I didn't back Oak.

[@eternity_complex]

So many people in these comments desperate for validation from TDT about their overpriced Kickstarter game. "I preordered this, you have to say it's good!"

[@DoctorGarro]

@@EfrainRiveraJunior I think he was agreeing with you. I don’t. I love Oak and I’m glad I have it in my collection. You should try before you judge it just because Tom didn’t like it. It’s way better than Tom said, IMO.

[@EfrainRiveraJunior]

@@DoctorGarro - You are right. I deleted my comment.

[@roseability86]

@@eternity_complex lol. Or maybe we just like the game and think Tom's assessment is wrong?! I backed Chamber of Wonders and I openly admit that game is rubbish.

[@Montag451]

@@eternity_complex I didn't even buy Oak, I played my friend's copy. There's also a retail version that's just fine, production-wise. GBG is hardly a company that overproduces its games.

[@bertrand391]

first bad review of ToE i witness... wonder what the rest of the DT crew thinks of it too.

[@speedandstyletony]

Burger Pile-Up! is one I tried playing last night, note I said "tried", as it is so bad you can't. Luckily, I bought it for a dollar so no big loss.