reference:
http://www.timewastersguide.com/view.php?id=987I have to say that I actually disagree with Jam's criticisms. I'm not sure why being "not really a card game" is a detraction, for one thing. I agree that it isn't in the traditional sense, but then, neither are a lot of games. It doesn't change how fun it is.
Also, I've only played two player games. I was neck and neck with my opponent overall. One would gain an obvious advantage over the other, but then would lose it before the game was over.
And as for the rules, well, my friend explained it to me and I though that went well enough. I don't think it pulled from the game so much.
The biggest reason why I'd still agree with the clock score, however, is it isn't a "big time-waster." It's not something I could play all afternoon. Maybe one or two rounds of it, taking up maybe a half hour of the day. If you want long term entertainment, you have to go somewhere else. It's also less engrossing than a lot of games. I agree with JP's remarks on the seriousness (though I don't find it not being funny a detraction -- I mean, Axis and Allies isn't very funny either, is it?) but it's not so absorbing and fascinating like other games I've played. It's a solid work, but not destined to replace anything. It just lacks that
je ne sais quoi of the truly great game.
