|
|
Post by raziel0420 on Jan 24, 2012 11:46:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by zerodemon on Jan 24, 2012 13:45:58 GMT -5
Weird. Wonder if it's compatible with Quest...
Thought it might be a Kinder Bunnies esque thing, but the box says 13+.
Curiouser and curiouser
|
|
|
|
Post by TheDavii on Jan 24, 2012 14:31:37 GMT -5
Haven't heard a thing about this.
We'll probably see this game released in the Gencon period too.
But it raises another question I can throw out to the masses: should MagicCarrot attempt to support (separate forum areas, etc.) spin-off games that do not include Killer Bunnies or significantly differ in mechanics?
For one (me), I'm spread too thin over KB Quest, KB Jupiter, KB Odyssey, Kinder, and KB Conquest. Psychic Penguin Voyage Home (PPV) may far exceed the time I will have available.
|
|
|
|
Post by zerodemon on Jan 24, 2012 14:40:43 GMT -5
I guess the only way to really decide is to wait and see if it follows the normal Killer Bunnies mechanics (ie the run system) or can be used as a booster to the Quest line.
If it looks like you're going to be taking on more work with this, I don't mind doing some of the legwork around the forum.
|
|
|
|
Post by TheDavii on Jan 24, 2012 15:35:07 GMT -5
I hope Playroom releases a 2012 catalog soon. Then we can know what their plans are. We've been promised J2J and KB Conquest expansions, and PPV so far. Are there more surprises in store for us?
|
|
|
|
Post by zerodemon on Jan 24, 2012 17:08:59 GMT -5
Should have some Info for you soon.
|
|
|
|
Post by zerodemon on Jan 24, 2012 21:13:09 GMT -5
Ppv is NOT quest compatible. I had a chat with jb on Facebook and he confirmed for me. May not be a necessary addition here. He also says general release is October, though it should be available to purchase at Gencon.
|
|
|
|
Post by TheDavii on Jan 25, 2012 9:16:57 GMT -5
I'm glad that PPV is not Quest-compatible. Why on Earth would we need 3 games (Quest + Conquest already are) that are compatible? Compatibility also means they share the same weaknesses (and presumably strengths). The randomness of Quest/Conquest gets to people. I don't need to pay again for the same game with different artwork! (Get that enough with the "Star Wars" movies, from VHS, to Laserdisc, to DVD, to Bluray).
Didn't they say "October" for Chocolate and it was actually ~December 21 that it hit stores?
Thanks for the update!
|
|
|
|
Post by zerodemon on Jan 25, 2012 11:01:34 GMT -5
Honestly, I'm pleased about it too. Quest, Conquest and Kinder are really more than enough. The concept is an interesting one. I imagine it will still use the run system (since that is KB key mechanic) but the focus has been removed from carrots. Sounds like the game is based around the idea of the C-Deck from odyssey, with teleporting your penguins home, while, I assume, scuppering the other penguin player's plans to do the same.
Curious to see whether it will be a unique idea, or a boxed version of a penguin focussed odyssey deck with a shared draw pile.
|
|
|
|
Post by TheDavii on Jan 26, 2012 13:57:48 GMT -5
I imagine it will still use the run system (since that is KB key mechanic) but the focus has been removed from carrots. Kinder doesn't use the 5-in-hand, 2 down, does it? (It has been a while since I've played it; I try to leave that one to the kids). Honestly, I'd like to see a different mechanic used for new games. I like the pop-culture aspect of the games, but the plan-ahead-for-non-deterministic- outcomes isn't as fun, as say, Robo-Rally, where you plan ahead, but many things can go wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by zerodemon on Jan 27, 2012 0:23:09 GMT -5
JB confirmed for me. The game does use the Run system. May just be wishlisting, but I honestly think the game will effectively be Ultimate Odyssey, but only using the Penguin elements, a bunch more cards specific to this theme and a shared draw pile. The box art also suggests the inclusion of resources.  |
|
|
|
Post by TheDavii on Jan 28, 2012 8:38:43 GMT -5
JB confirmed for me. The game does use the Run system. May just be wishlisting, but I honestly think the game will effectively be Ultimate Odyssey, but only using the Penguin elements, a bunch more cards specific to this theme and a shared draw pile. The box art also suggests the inclusion of resources. I'm puzzled on why one wouldn't just buy Odyssey, then. Can't one buy the C-decks without buying the A- and B- decks? Or is the difference the "shared draw pile"? |
|
|
|
Post by zerodemon on Jan 28, 2012 15:52:24 GMT -5
1) Odyssey is quite an investment and built towards deck building and customised play. My feeling is that Odyssey probably hasn't been a huge success (the release schedule has dropped off entirely) but, because the system is solid, a boxed game using the mechanics is very valid. We've been playing a draw pile version of Odyssey for a while, because finding other players willing to invest when systems such as Magic: The Gathering exist with a much greater player base is very difficult.
2) The A Starters are pretty crucial in terms of having enough resources to play with since each B or C expansion only comes with 2 resource cards and most decks need a pretty high % of these cards.
3) The idea of it being based on Odyssey is pure conjecture on my part. I obviously have no idea.
4) The cards made for Odyssey are really not built for a shared draw pile style of game. It took a lot of jiggery pokery on my part to make it work. I imagine PPV will have more shared draw friendly cards (a la Quest or J2J.)
|
|
|
|
Post by TheDavii on Jan 28, 2012 19:15:47 GMT -5
1) Odyssey is quite an investment and built towards deck building and customised play. My feeling is that Odyssey probably hasn't been a huge success (the release schedule has dropped off entirely) but, because the system is solid, a boxed game using the mechanics is very valid. We've been playing a draw pile version of Odyssey for a while, because finding other players willing to invest when systems such as Magic: The Gathering exist with a much greater player base is very difficult. 2) The A Starters are pretty crucial in terms of having enough resources to play with since each B or C expansion only comes with 2 resource cards and most decks need a pretty high % of these cards. 3) The idea of it being based on Odyssey is pure conjecture on my part. I obviously have no idea. 4) The cards made for Odyssey are really not built for a shared draw pile style of game. It took a lot of jiggery pokery on my part to make it work. I imagine PPV will have more shared draw friendly cards (a la Quest or J2J.) I like when people number their statements. It makes them so much easier to respond to! Thank you. On 1) I don't know if the whole "constructable" idea was well-thought-out from a Marketing (capital M) perspective as opposed to marketing (small m, or 'sales') perspective. The plan results in a lot of SKUs (StocK Units) that are difficult to accommodate in small gaming stores (due to lack of shelf space to allocate to one game) or even big box retail stores (other than the Internet). One retailer I spoke with at Christmas (who elected not to stock the game) said "Two collectible games are enough for us." Certainly collectible vs. constructable was not in the forefront of his thinking. But with collectible games, they only need to carry 2 SKUs (or whatever the number is per game x 2 games), not 6 (colors) x 14 series (or whatever the planned total is), which is a lot for any retailer (except Amazon) to carry. The other problem I see is that even though consumers "will always know which cards are in each deck" (stated goal) why would you buy "early" when you can wait and see what all of the cards are going to be before you make your decision on what decks to buy? That would tend to depress sales until all of the cards are released. That, and when we've played Odyssey, we have all of the decks and our friends play our decks. They haven't bought any of their own yet (if they ever will). |
|
|
|
Post by sonerich on Jun 11, 2012 12:58:49 GMT -5
Sorry if this is common knowledge but any idea when this game maybe released?
|
|
