Lately, I’ve been thinking about a couple of board games I was tempted to purchase.
The Thing: Infection at Outpost 31 is a brand new cooperative game based on the 1982 movie (and John W. Campbell’s novella “Who Goes There”, that it was based on. An American Antarctic station runs into problems with an alien creature that can take on the form of an organism it comes across. It is one of my favourite films, and so seeing this game made me sit up. Obviously, although a cooperative game, there will be a “traitor” element in the form of whichever station crew member gets infected/imitated.
New Angeles is the most recent game set in the Android universe. It is a semi-cooperative – the players have to cooperate to keep the city running, or else they may all lose; while making sure they make more money out of the various deals going on.
Both appeal to me a lot, but I am beginning to take on a new way of thinking about such things. Previously I would look at games and ask myself “Does the game look good?” and “Do I want it?”. The answer for both of this games is a very solid “Yes”.
But now, I am asking myself “If I buy this game, what games in my collection will I not play?” For example New Angeles has been favourably compared to Battlestar Galactica – a game I love and don’t get the chance to play enough. The Thing would no doubt take the table from other cooperative games in my collection. Do I really want to spend money on new games that will only result in my playing existing much-loved games even less?
So much as I love the idea of these games, I think I will be giving them a pass for now. Even though Elijah Wood does such an excellent job at selling it.