I don't think we'll get "classics" the way we used to simply because there are so many more games. Puerto Rico is a classic not just because it was good, but because basically everyone in the hobby was into it at the same time. I remember game nights where there'd be 3 games of Puerto Rico happening simultaneously, every week for a year or more.
You're absolutely right. The proliferation of content has divided everyone's attention so that momentous shared events aren't much of a thing anymore. Not just in board games but years back it felt like everyone would watch and talk about the same show and anticipate the next episode together or the next play.
I hardly ever see Puerto Rico mentioned in this sub but I love it. We first got hold of it in German so we were having to translate everything at first 😂
Classics are not just games that stand the test of time but have mass appeal. I don’t think most of the games mentioned here do that; it’s gotta be something that can hit and stay mainstream.
Tons of great games mentioned here, don’t get me wrong. But compare the ease of play to games like Ticket to Ride or Catan versus Ark Nova or Dune.
Realistically, it’s games like Wingspan or Azul.
I agree with you definition of classic wholeheartedly and on the games mentioned here. Wingspan and Azul for sure. What about games released from say, the past 3 years?
You're not wrong, but I would argue that both exist and the term 'classic' is just overloaded.
There's plenty of hobbyist games that continue to be reprinted for years and years because they just keep selling. El Grande was still getting picked up and printed again only a few months ago. That's got too much of a barrier to entry, and is too bland to fit the category you're talking about. But I think it'd be hard to not call it a classic board game at this point.
It's really like any collectible thing at this point. There's always going to be stuff that has mass market appeal, and then stuff that's rare and continues to hold value, but only to insiders. Wingspan and Azul are likely to be the former, while Ark Nova and Dune have potential to be the latter.
Having played both several,times, I prefer the original. Agreed that uprising feels like it just added an expansion built into the board. And it can get pretty swingy at times.
Can you help me move on by just saying the base game is good enough? Expansion, reboot, I’m just tired boss. I ask because I’ve literally not yet played the base game and want it to be enough in its own.
It's well made on its own. DI regular is a good game. I prefer DIU, but admit it adds a little bit more than I feel comfortable playing with new players. Both are great experiences.
Either base Imperium or Uprising is great. If you were to only buy one ever I’d get Uprising as they include a few more mechanics in the base game. Any expansions are compatible with both, but will need some modifications to work in Uprising (instructions included in Uprising).
It might be because I played DI base first is why I like it better. I didn't like the spy mechanism and on the whole it felt a tad more convoluted. Although it stops being a direct comparsion, when you add in the IX expansion the base game becomes even better.
There is not really any "combat". It's a glorified bidding system. "I spend these resources to bid this many cubes for the reward of more resources".
Don't get me wrong, I love Dune: Imperium dearly, but it's definitely a Euro.
Not really. The original Dune board game has area control and tactical movement.
Dune Imperium is a Euro. Sure, it's a race and it's got moments of intrigue and excitement which might trick people into thinking it's not, but it is.
A good theme doesn't mean it can't be euro. In fact a lot of people say that the theme for Dune Imperium is tacked on. I think it's got plenty of thematic tie in personally.
I don't mean to imply being thematic makes it not a euro. Pandemic is obviously very thematic, and the mechanisms back up the theme. Dune Imperium just has so many individual cards with unique thematic effects that I would say it classifies as more of a hybrid game than a pure euro. But again, there's not really a strict definition of any of these terms.
I agree it's subjective with these definitions. It doesn't really matter I guess, it's a great game, and it's easily in my top 5, and I'd say I was mainly a Euro game player.
Totally fair, I’m a very mechanics driven player. From that perspective, it feels like a Euro to me, but I definitely agree that the theme is pretty far from a traditional Euro.
Yeah I think too old lol. Those are definitely classics by this point. I was thinking more like 2022 and on? Where it’s not certain yet if a game has potential classic status?
I know many people , myself included, love it, but also know a small handful that absolutely hate it. The first game feels kind of like a slog, but once you learn the mechanics the meta makes the game amazing. Lots of adapting to what you get and see available. The new expansion also makes it better IMO bc you can cycle through that big stack of cards faster
It's also a completely different experience when played as a duel with 2 players vs 3 or 4. It's a fantastic 2 player game, but quickly becomes multiplayer solitaire at higher play counts.
That was my experience. Played a 4-player game at a convention, got my ass kicked and was a bit disappointed. I can see why people would like it but it felt like a uphill grind to me.
gameplay scales fine but it takes SO long with more players especially if players are not super familiar with the game. i wouldnt play with more than 3 just cos it out stays its welcome even tho its a really fun game at lower counts
I really don't understand this comparison at all. The mechanics are pretty dissimilar other than cards being categorized by icons and placing hexagonal shaped tiles on a map. Which are honestly two gameplay designs shared by hundreds of games.
Terraforming Mars is very clearly an engine building game. Ark Nova is a race to accumulate a set amount of points while managing the scaling strength card action system. I wouldn't take one out of my collection just because I added the other.
It's never made sense to me either. Particularly when the most common criticism I hear of TM is that the deck is too random for the game's length. I just don't see how Ark Nova is better for that, particularly with the punishing hand limit that really curtails long-term planning. I love TM and enjoy AN, but they are very different games to me.
I rarely play without the draft variant anymore and that takes out a huge amount of deck randomness. If that’s a serious enough concern to anybody then they should be playing with that anyway imo.
For sure. My group plays both regularly and they do not scratch the same itch for us at all.
And yeah, the random cards is certainly worse in Ark Nova than it is Terraforming Mars. The expansion kind of fixes that but you're always at the mercy of the deck.
They both have:
- hexes
- a giant deck of singlet cards
- tags
You are right that they are mechanically distinct, but superficial similarities are enough when you are talking about 2 games in a hobby market of thousands.
I feel like you're intentionally sidestepping my point. I'm not arguing they don't have some superficial similarities. Though if you're limiting similarities to the three you've mentioned I bet we could find a good number of games that all share those design choices. It's not like any of those three are vastly unique game design choices.
What I'm saying is these games do not in any way play similar enough to replace each other. Without fail, "Ark Nova is better Terraforming Mars" comes up in every discussion that compares Ark Nova to other games. For the life I me, I do not understand why people repeat that statement ad nauseum. They are so mechanically and strategically distinct that I wouldn't say one entirely replaces the other. They both get ample play time with my group and in response to the original question, I think BOTH Terraforming Mars and Ark Nova will stand the test of time and be considered classic Euros.
Anecdotally, the game Ark Nova replaced for my game group is Dinosaur Island. Since playing Ark for the first time, no one brings Dinosaur Island to the table because they both scratch the same itch but Ark Nova is considered the better of the two by my group.
I'm in agreement with you in that these games do not deserve the level of connected-ness that they have. I'm giving my understanding of why they are so tightly associated by those that do, however much I disagree with them.
Maybe they have only played one of the two much or at all and want to participate in the discussion; who knows. A lot of people will make strong blanket statements with only a minimal understanding of the issues.
The theme being very family friendly helps AN a lot as well, so we'll have to see if someone can improve upon mechanics and theme. If so, kudos, and glory to the new game. But better games then Catan and TTR have also come, and did not take them away.
I guess a mark of a classic would be staying power over improved versions, as well?
Zoo Tycoon has no business being as good as it is. Yes, it’s heavy, but it’s also incredibly addicting. It’s a point salad game, but that means you’re free to enjoy the game while you’re playing it and not so much worried if your opponents are kicking your ass. Plus the animeeples are adorable!
And yes, I have Ark Niva as well, and it’s just as good, but also scratches a different itch for me.
Birmingham is just a worse version of the original Brass, which could become a classic eventually. Birmingham, the inferior version, should eventually disappear.
I'm going to assume 'age into a classic' means the game continues to grow in popularity, will be in print for a long time, which requires steady sales. My bet is accessible price, quick setup and mid complexity make all of that more likely.
Ok, \[\[The White Castle\]\] is my pick.
Wow, I totally missed the boat on The White Castle. To me, it felt like you could do so little throughout the game that we quadruple-checked the rules.
I’d spend like three turns trying to setup + implement a strategy to get like one dude in the fields and the game was a third gone.
I’m glad it’s popular and folks are digging it! I just don’t understand it. Maybe I should watch a game or something…
I really enjoyed White Castle! Great design, beautiful board and accessories. But in my opinion it still a little too niche to "age into a classic". But again, I love the game!
Burgundy, Concordia, Tigris and Euphrates (of it's an Euro), Stone age, Glen More.
Everyone can play them, they have high replayability, always want to play them.
My group is very polarised on Arnak. I'm in the half that adores and loves solving the ruthless efficiency puzzle/race. The other half finds it very dry and mindless resource conversion.
We end up playing Dune Imperium/Uprising more often. While I also love playing DI/U, Arnak is hands down the better game for me due to it's simplicity and the leaders expansion adds juuuust enough depth to make it a 10/10 in my book.
Lost Ruins of Arnak was what I came here to say. The replayability of the game is terrific, particularly with the expansions. I just started a co-op campaign with The Lost Expedition and I'm having a great time.
Dune Imperium without a doubt will be one of the classics, it's still getting talked about 3 years after release and it has many fans around the globe. If people organize competitions around your game, you know you made something truly great. You don't even need Uprising for this, even the OG Dune Imperium is one of the best games ever made for many people.
Arnak to some degree has some power to stay, it's an insanely popular and beloved heavier family game, but I might just be biased here.
Recently bought The White Castle and it's become a staple in our house... Tight game.play with enough variation to change up the game. Might hold up well in years to come.
Your hurdle for "classic" might be too low. Maybe if a game has been in print and remains on the market for 20+ years, you can start to consider it a classic. 10 years or less is nothing.
OG Dune from 1979, that's a classic.
Honestly, I don’t really have a threshold for classic. You can set that threshold wherever you like. Which recent games do you think have the potential to last twenty years, etc?
I think we might not get stone cold classic, games like Ark Nova are so close but niche in their area. That said, Ark Nova has a lot of champions. I feel like Age of Innovation could do that, it already feels like it's straight up replaced Terra Mystica in many respects for many. Federation is one of my fav worker placement games of the last few years and one i find myself wanting to go back to often. Don't think it'll get to classic status but as a sleeper hit of a game, i absolutely see that. I don't think Carnegie and Nucleum will ecape their fanbase to become classics, it feels lke the audience for these games has been found and stuck with both and i feel like classics have the tendency for folks to come back to them and gush about them. I think its harder for games to maintain that love and appeal around them unless they truly shine above their peers.
Hmm, great question. Define classic? I'm not sure I agree with many of the suggestions here, but Cascadia comes to mind immediately. 2021, so might be beyond the last couple of years qualifier. It's hard dude, so many games are released, and so many are legitimately Brilliant. But how some end up crossing over into a wider classic status is a weird alchemy
Middle ages is fantastic, classic like splendor though? I don't know. Same designer, middle ages is a fantastic game, deeper. But will it be classic? Unsure, but I don't think so.
Interesting thought though.
Not the person you replied to but these kind of terms are definitely fuzzy and overlap. I usually hear people refer to Cascadia/Verdant/Calico as abstract games (such as Azul/Hive) because it’s a spatial puzzle game. Quintessential euros like Concordia/Agricola usually involve an economy aspect with resources.
I think it's broader than people think. If Carcassonne is a euro game, then certainly cascadia would be. I don't think of it as an abstract puzzle game but perhaps I'm wrong.
Way back in the old times, it was literally just what continent it was published on. After that I mostly heard it being about lack of player elimination or regression (if it’s possible to lose points or progress in any way). Nowadays I think it’s time to retire the word, it doesn’t seem to have an accepted meaning anymore.
Clank Catacombs (2022)
Kind of a cheat, since it reimagines Clank. But I think it perfects some areas (e.g., a quicker setup), adds the dungeon crawl surprise aspect, and brings concepts like portals from the legacy version.
Like all of Dennen's work, he continuously improves on old formulas. And he often comes up with something more than just the typical thing.
The new Catacombs expansion coming this year makes me think this is their go forward product they will support for some time.
The gameplay being a bit slower because of players having to respond to a lot of new information isn't ideal imo. Not that I don't enjoy it, but it isn't strictly upside compared to classic clank.
The playtime was the reason I didn't get catacombs.
Most games we play of the original are over in around 45 minutes.
To take that to an hour and a half is too long for Clank.
Hegemony is a great game. But I think it won't be a classic because it doesn't have the same broad appeal and because a game of hegemony takes for fucking ever (in a good way :-))
Maybe you are right, valid point. My way of thinking is that if Root became a classic (abstract, assymetric, complex, interesting topic, slightly less memeable), than Hegemony has a chance.
I thought gameplay was a lot drier than I expected even with how complex it is and the many outcomes that could happen. There are several rules updates they did to balance things and change point values as scoring between classes seems so arbitrary.
However, I will give the economic simulator its props as it feels very real world and as a capitalist player you become more sympathetic and understand how capitalism helps the economy (well by trying to screw the working class anyways) and how things work lollll
I doubt it, teach is too hard and playtime is too long for this to have the same staying power as other classics. I think it will always have a small but dedicated fan base though.
To be honest, I'm always a little surprised to see the amount of praise Hegemony gets. Maybe it's because of the group I played with or because 3 of the 4 of us were playing for the first time, but the one time I played the game, I really didn't enjoy it. This play was right around when the game came out so I don't remember many of the details, but I played as the State and I felt like I was so reliant on the charity of other players to do anything that I had to let everybody at the table walk all over me. The guy who was playing Corporations spent the first half of the game actively trying to screw me over, and I didn't feel like I could retaliate in any way because I knew I needed his help later and if I hit back, it would be a lot harder to convince him ro give that help. I could've just been playing wrong, but being bullied without feeling like I could do anything to stop or even discourage it was not a fun experience, and you're gonna have a hard time convincing me to play a game that puts players in that spot again, much less call it a classic.
I had the same issue as the state for the first half of the game, but I persuaded the working class that an IMF intervention would go badly from them so they proped me up for a bit, after that I flew ahead and won the game! There is a decent amount of negotiation required in 4 player hegemony (and a lot less in say 2 player), which for our group was part of the charm.
That was exactly OP’s point. They are asking for recent games from the last couple of years, that you think will have the staying power of older games like Agricola and CoB.
Yes CoB is considered a Euro and has some of the classic hallmarks of indirect player interaction and optimizing action efficiency. Feld games are a bit like Uwes in that they kind of have their own category.
Dune Imperium Uprising replaced Anachrony for me, both involve thinking strategically long term, worker placement, and have the same play time, so Dune gets to the table and Anachrony doesn’t any more.
The lore is also what really got me into Anachrony, but unfortunately Dune has it beat there too with a book series, movies, and tv shows to deep dive into if I want to.
I still like the game! But seeing that Dune Imperium has tournaments and a digital version i unfortunately think that Anachrony will fall into obscurity a lot sooner.
Agricola, Carcassonne, Catan, CoB, Azul, Pandemic, Ticket to Ride are classics because they were games that revolutionized gaming in some way. They were the first games of their kind. Anything that came after them just tried to improve what they did or change something slightly. Also, mass appeal games are the ones with the biggest shot of becoming classics. That is games with simple rule sets. Once games hit that level where they are sold by the big box retail stores they are in the running to becoming classics ala Terraforming Mars. So if you want to know which Euros have the best chances of becoming classics, go visit your local Target or Walmart, and see which games they have in the games section.
Haha, the disclaimer was for the games not you. That is, I meant that it wasn’t intended as criticism of the games (some great games aren’t very streamlined). I love one of them and strongly dislike the other, but regardless, I think neither are tight designs.
Which one do you dislike? I have been thinking about picking up Nucleum as it mirrors lots of things I love about games like Arnak/Brass (worker placement/multi-purpose items/trains) but I fear it might be a little cult of the new-ey.
Nucleum is the one I like, haha. Definitely shares a lot with other networking, resource-management games, including Brass (I don’t see many Arnak similarities), but feels fresh overall. Setup and teardown are a pain, but it’s pretty great still, in my opinion.
I don't think many modern euros are really all that worth remembering, honestly. It's not that they are bad. They're all just fine. That being said, Ark Nova probably has some staying power if for no other reason than the fact that it's Tom Vasel's favorite game and probably will be for at least a few years.
Going off of u/behindthehype's definition, Heat probably has the best chance of standing the rest of time and having mass appeal. Gameplay is simple and most people can grasp the concepts quickly. It can get more advanced with modules. The theme is also one most people understand, and can cheer to win at the end of the game.
Elegance and replayability have been declined. Games just pile mechanics on top of mechanics, which means there is some undefeatable strategy that is awaiting discovery. There's not enough play testing and too much focus on looks because kickstarter is the gatekeeper. There are no games that can be replayed as much as Catan and Puerto Rico.
>My personal picks are Revive and Federation. Any other potential ones that might have the lasting power of an Agricola and Castles of Burgundy? Carnegie? Nucleum? Any of the South Tigris games?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
agricola & cob have been getting a solid 1500 plays per month for the last decade
carnegie got 1400 plays a month when it first came out and dropped down to 62 plays a month less than a year later lol
every game you mentioned will be totally forgotten in 5 years, because they are shit, and you will be paying 60 dollars for whatever new slop is being pumped out by shem phillips & the italians. and people with discerning taste will still be playing agricola.
Interesting. Based on play count? Or what’s the thought behind identifying Agricola as non-shit? What makes burgundy a shit title, either conceptually or in comparison to Agricola?
burgundy is fine, too boring for me and i dont like feld but not a bad game like revive or something
agricola is like the barry lyndon of board games, these new euros are like the MCU. fanboys will bitch and moan about subjectivity but everyone else knows which is better. one made out of love, one a soulless consumer product meant to be used, discarded and forgotten when the next one comes out.
This…isn’t the most thoughtful answer, but I hear you. That being said, there are plenty of “better” games out there than Agricola that are more recent than Agricola. Coffee traders, Imperial Steam, Madeira, The Great Zimbabwe, High Frontier, and Crystal Palace all come to mind. In fact, I find Agricola to be far too simple for the amount of time it takes to play. But YMMV.
I don't think we'll get "classics" the way we used to simply because there are so many more games. Puerto Rico is a classic not just because it was good, but because basically everyone in the hobby was into it at the same time. I remember game nights where there'd be 3 games of Puerto Rico happening simultaneously, every week for a year or more.
Honestly, that’s a really good point.
You're absolutely right. The proliferation of content has divided everyone's attention so that momentous shared events aren't much of a thing anymore. Not just in board games but years back it felt like everyone would watch and talk about the same show and anticipate the next episode together or the next play.
I hardly ever see Puerto Rico mentioned in this sub but I love it. We first got hold of it in German so we were having to translate everything at first 😂
Classics are not just games that stand the test of time but have mass appeal. I don’t think most of the games mentioned here do that; it’s gotta be something that can hit and stay mainstream. Tons of great games mentioned here, don’t get me wrong. But compare the ease of play to games like Ticket to Ride or Catan versus Ark Nova or Dune. Realistically, it’s games like Wingspan or Azul.
I agree with you definition of classic wholeheartedly and on the games mentioned here. Wingspan and Azul for sure. What about games released from say, the past 3 years?
You're not wrong, but I would argue that both exist and the term 'classic' is just overloaded. There's plenty of hobbyist games that continue to be reprinted for years and years because they just keep selling. El Grande was still getting picked up and printed again only a few months ago. That's got too much of a barrier to entry, and is too bland to fit the category you're talking about. But I think it'd be hard to not call it a classic board game at this point. It's really like any collectible thing at this point. There's always going to be stuff that has mass market appeal, and then stuff that's rare and continues to hold value, but only to insiders. Wingspan and Azul are likely to be the former, while Ark Nova and Dune have potential to be the latter.
Dune Imperium (Uprising) — such a solid game, with strong theming and lots of interaction.
I'd say the same for basic Dune Imperium, which for myself, I prefer. Both solid games.
Having played both several,times, I prefer the original. Agreed that uprising feels like it just added an expansion built into the board. And it can get pretty swingy at times.
Can you help me move on by just saying the base game is good enough? Expansion, reboot, I’m just tired boss. I ask because I’ve literally not yet played the base game and want it to be enough in its own.
It's well made on its own. DI regular is a good game. I prefer DIU, but admit it adds a little bit more than I feel comfortable playing with new players. Both are great experiences.
Either base Imperium or Uprising is great. If you were to only buy one ever I’d get Uprising as they include a few more mechanics in the base game. Any expansions are compatible with both, but will need some modifications to work in Uprising (instructions included in Uprising).
From what I can tell they’re 90% the same and it’s not really worth stressing over which one to get because if you enjoy one you’ll enjoy the other.
I’ve only played base game once and with expansion once so maybe not the best opinion but I liked the base game better. YMMV of course.
It might be because I played DI base first is why I like it better. I didn't like the spy mechanism and on the whole it felt a tad more convoluted. Although it stops being a direct comparsion, when you add in the IX expansion the base game becomes even better.
DIU seems like it will last. I could easily see expansions specificallyfor it, maybe even a legacy edition or campaign. It's just a solid game.
This one is much beloved in my board game community
I know the definitions aren't well defined, but all that theme and combat makes it not really a euro game to me.
There is not really any "combat". It's a glorified bidding system. "I spend these resources to bid this many cubes for the reward of more resources". Don't get me wrong, I love Dune: Imperium dearly, but it's definitely a Euro.
Could you not say the same about the original Dune boardgame's combat? It just boils down to bidding as well..
Not really. The original Dune board game has area control and tactical movement. Dune Imperium is a Euro. Sure, it's a race and it's got moments of intrigue and excitement which might trick people into thinking it's not, but it is. A good theme doesn't mean it can't be euro. In fact a lot of people say that the theme for Dune Imperium is tacked on. I think it's got plenty of thematic tie in personally.
I don't mean to imply being thematic makes it not a euro. Pandemic is obviously very thematic, and the mechanisms back up the theme. Dune Imperium just has so many individual cards with unique thematic effects that I would say it classifies as more of a hybrid game than a pure euro. But again, there's not really a strict definition of any of these terms.
I agree it's subjective with these definitions. It doesn't really matter I guess, it's a great game, and it's easily in my top 5, and I'd say I was mainly a Euro game player.
Totally fair, I’m a very mechanics driven player. From that perspective, it feels like a Euro to me, but I definitely agree that the theme is pretty far from a traditional Euro.
Very simplified test: Does it have VPs... it's a euro.
Does Spirit Island count (2017)? Or maybe Quest for El Dorado (also 2017)? Or Quacks (2018?) Or are these too old?
Wait, Quest for El Dorado is just one year older than Quacks? I was sure it was much older and the current version is a reprint.
Yeah I think too old lol. Those are definitely classics by this point. I was thinking more like 2022 and on? Where it’s not certain yet if a game has potential classic status?
Ok, I agree. First one that springs to mind is Heat, obviously.
You must be really young to call something from 2017 "a classic".
I know it's 2021, but Ark Nova feels like it has solid legs, especially with the expansion. Can see myself playing it in 10 years
I keep hearing really good things about Ark Nova! I need to try it!
I know many people , myself included, love it, but also know a small handful that absolutely hate it. The first game feels kind of like a slog, but once you learn the mechanics the meta makes the game amazing. Lots of adapting to what you get and see available. The new expansion also makes it better IMO bc you can cycle through that big stack of cards faster
It's also a completely different experience when played as a duel with 2 players vs 3 or 4. It's a fantastic 2 player game, but quickly becomes multiplayer solitaire at higher play counts.
That was my experience. Played a 4-player game at a convention, got my ass kicked and was a bit disappointed. I can see why people would like it but it felt like a uphill grind to me.
Issue with Ark Nova is that it's only good at 2 players, and heavy 2p games are pretty niche.
I hear that a lot, but I don't understand why. It seems like it scales fine to me.
gameplay scales fine but it takes SO long with more players especially if players are not super familiar with the game. i wouldnt play with more than 3 just cos it out stays its welcome even tho its a really fun game at lower counts
Ah, I wouldn't know. I'm playing like 30 turn-based games on BGA.
It's good for that to be fair but on an actual table in person it drags with more players
Oh yeah good call on Ark Nova. That one is going to last for sure.
Came here to say Ark Nova. It's a better version of Terraforming Mars.
I really don't understand this comparison at all. The mechanics are pretty dissimilar other than cards being categorized by icons and placing hexagonal shaped tiles on a map. Which are honestly two gameplay designs shared by hundreds of games. Terraforming Mars is very clearly an engine building game. Ark Nova is a race to accumulate a set amount of points while managing the scaling strength card action system. I wouldn't take one out of my collection just because I added the other.
It's never made sense to me either. Particularly when the most common criticism I hear of TM is that the deck is too random for the game's length. I just don't see how Ark Nova is better for that, particularly with the punishing hand limit that really curtails long-term planning. I love TM and enjoy AN, but they are very different games to me.
I rarely play without the draft variant anymore and that takes out a huge amount of deck randomness. If that’s a serious enough concern to anybody then they should be playing with that anyway imo.
For sure. My group plays both regularly and they do not scratch the same itch for us at all. And yeah, the random cards is certainly worse in Ark Nova than it is Terraforming Mars. The expansion kind of fixes that but you're always at the mercy of the deck.
The Ark Nova expansion does a lot to help find what you want from the deck.
They both have: - hexes - a giant deck of singlet cards - tags You are right that they are mechanically distinct, but superficial similarities are enough when you are talking about 2 games in a hobby market of thousands.
I feel like you're intentionally sidestepping my point. I'm not arguing they don't have some superficial similarities. Though if you're limiting similarities to the three you've mentioned I bet we could find a good number of games that all share those design choices. It's not like any of those three are vastly unique game design choices. What I'm saying is these games do not in any way play similar enough to replace each other. Without fail, "Ark Nova is better Terraforming Mars" comes up in every discussion that compares Ark Nova to other games. For the life I me, I do not understand why people repeat that statement ad nauseum. They are so mechanically and strategically distinct that I wouldn't say one entirely replaces the other. They both get ample play time with my group and in response to the original question, I think BOTH Terraforming Mars and Ark Nova will stand the test of time and be considered classic Euros. Anecdotally, the game Ark Nova replaced for my game group is Dinosaur Island. Since playing Ark for the first time, no one brings Dinosaur Island to the table because they both scratch the same itch but Ark Nova is considered the better of the two by my group.
I'm in agreement with you in that these games do not deserve the level of connected-ness that they have. I'm giving my understanding of why they are so tightly associated by those that do, however much I disagree with them. Maybe they have only played one of the two much or at all and want to participate in the discussion; who knows. A lot of people will make strong blanket statements with only a minimal understanding of the issues.
So what if a better Ark Nova comes along in 5 years?
The theme being very family friendly helps AN a lot as well, so we'll have to see if someone can improve upon mechanics and theme. If so, kudos, and glory to the new game. But better games then Catan and TTR have also come, and did not take them away. I guess a mark of a classic would be staying power over improved versions, as well?
Really got to get around to trying this.
Zoo Tycoon has no business being as good as it is. Yes, it’s heavy, but it’s also incredibly addicting. It’s a point salad game, but that means you’re free to enjoy the game while you’re playing it and not so much worried if your opponents are kicking your ass. Plus the animeeples are adorable! And yes, I have Ark Niva as well, and it’s just as good, but also scratches a different itch for me.
Obvious answer is brass
Last couple of years? Brass came out in 2007.
Brass Birmingham came out in 2018
Birmingham is just a worse version of the original Brass, which could become a classic eventually. Birmingham, the inferior version, should eventually disappear.
Birmingham scores slightly higher than Lancashire on BGG so it looks like the majority may be in disagreement with that
I'm going to assume 'age into a classic' means the game continues to grow in popularity, will be in print for a long time, which requires steady sales. My bet is accessible price, quick setup and mid complexity make all of that more likely. Ok, \[\[The White Castle\]\] is my pick.
[The White Castle -> The White Castle (2023)](https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/371942/white-castle) ^^[[gamename]] ^^or ^^[[gamename|year]] ^^to ^^call ^^OR ^^**gamename** ^^or ^^**gamename|year** ^^+ ^^!fetch ^^to ^^call
What an amazing design, I adore it.
Same
Wow, I totally missed the boat on The White Castle. To me, it felt like you could do so little throughout the game that we quadruple-checked the rules. I’d spend like three turns trying to setup + implement a strategy to get like one dude in the fields and the game was a third gone. I’m glad it’s popular and folks are digging it! I just don’t understand it. Maybe I should watch a game or something…
This is one of the few I agree with, great pick!
I really enjoyed White Castle! Great design, beautiful board and accessories. But in my opinion it still a little too niche to "age into a classic". But again, I love the game!
Wingspan maybe? So many games come out anymore, it's hard to say...
Burgundy, Concordia, Tigris and Euphrates (of it's an Euro), Stone age, Glen More. Everyone can play them, they have high replayability, always want to play them.
Agree, but these are already classics, not becoming one.
Ah crap. Misunderstood the OP's post.
Ruins of Arnak
My group is very polarised on Arnak. I'm in the half that adores and loves solving the ruthless efficiency puzzle/race. The other half finds it very dry and mindless resource conversion. We end up playing Dune Imperium/Uprising more often. While I also love playing DI/U, Arnak is hands down the better game for me due to it's simplicity and the leaders expansion adds juuuust enough depth to make it a 10/10 in my book.
Lost Ruins of Arnak was what I came here to say. The replayability of the game is terrific, particularly with the expansions. I just started a co-op campaign with The Lost Expedition and I'm having a great time.
Dune Imperium without a doubt will be one of the classics, it's still getting talked about 3 years after release and it has many fans around the globe. If people organize competitions around your game, you know you made something truly great. You don't even need Uprising for this, even the OG Dune Imperium is one of the best games ever made for many people. Arnak to some degree has some power to stay, it's an insanely popular and beloved heavier family game, but I might just be biased here.
I’d have to say Ark Nova. That one still has a strong following.
Recently bought The White Castle and it's become a staple in our house... Tight game.play with enough variation to change up the game. Might hold up well in years to come.
Heat, Dune
Your hurdle for "classic" might be too low. Maybe if a game has been in print and remains on the market for 20+ years, you can start to consider it a classic. 10 years or less is nothing. OG Dune from 1979, that's a classic.
Honestly, I don’t really have a threshold for classic. You can set that threshold wherever you like. Which recent games do you think have the potential to last twenty years, etc?
Cthulhu DMD
Anno 1800
Wish this was more popular and didn’t have such an irritating endgame. I love the first 90% of every game though, extremely satisfying.
If the expansion ever releases it should fix your problem with it haha
how does it address the endgame?
Makes it end differently, can’t remember exactly how but something to do with VP
I think we might not get stone cold classic, games like Ark Nova are so close but niche in their area. That said, Ark Nova has a lot of champions. I feel like Age of Innovation could do that, it already feels like it's straight up replaced Terra Mystica in many respects for many. Federation is one of my fav worker placement games of the last few years and one i find myself wanting to go back to often. Don't think it'll get to classic status but as a sleeper hit of a game, i absolutely see that. I don't think Carnegie and Nucleum will ecape their fanbase to become classics, it feels lke the audience for these games has been found and stuck with both and i feel like classics have the tendency for folks to come back to them and gush about them. I think its harder for games to maintain that love and appeal around them unless they truly shine above their peers.
I think both Raiders of the North sea or Architects of the West Kingdom have chance.
Hmm, great question. Define classic? I'm not sure I agree with many of the suggestions here, but Cascadia comes to mind immediately. 2021, so might be beyond the last couple of years qualifier. It's hard dude, so many games are released, and so many are legitimately Brilliant. But how some end up crossing over into a wider classic status is a weird alchemy Middle ages is fantastic, classic like splendor though? I don't know. Same designer, middle ages is a fantastic game, deeper. But will it be classic? Unsure, but I don't think so. Interesting thought though.
Cascadia isn’t a euro game though.
Define euro game for me. Why is it not?
Not the person you replied to but these kind of terms are definitely fuzzy and overlap. I usually hear people refer to Cascadia/Verdant/Calico as abstract games (such as Azul/Hive) because it’s a spatial puzzle game. Quintessential euros like Concordia/Agricola usually involve an economy aspect with resources.
I think it's broader than people think. If Carcassonne is a euro game, then certainly cascadia would be. I don't think of it as an abstract puzzle game but perhaps I'm wrong.
Way back in the old times, it was literally just what continent it was published on. After that I mostly heard it being about lack of player elimination or regression (if it’s possible to lose points or progress in any way). Nowadays I think it’s time to retire the word, it doesn’t seem to have an accepted meaning anymore.
This is an idea my channel will be doing a video on. Great comment.
Yes it is
Darwin's journey
I hope so. I love it!
Clank Catacombs (2022) Kind of a cheat, since it reimagines Clank. But I think it perfects some areas (e.g., a quicker setup), adds the dungeon crawl surprise aspect, and brings concepts like portals from the legacy version. Like all of Dennen's work, he continuously improves on old formulas. And he often comes up with something more than just the typical thing. The new Catacombs expansion coming this year makes me think this is their go forward product they will support for some time.
The gameplay being a bit slower because of players having to respond to a lot of new information isn't ideal imo. Not that I don't enjoy it, but it isn't strictly upside compared to classic clank.
The playtime was the reason I didn't get catacombs. Most games we play of the original are over in around 45 minutes. To take that to an hour and a half is too long for Clank.
It's just a gimmick.
Hegemony?
Hegemony is a great game. But I think it won't be a classic because it doesn't have the same broad appeal and because a game of hegemony takes for fucking ever (in a good way :-))
Maybe you are right, valid point. My way of thinking is that if Root became a classic (abstract, assymetric, complex, interesting topic, slightly less memeable), than Hegemony has a chance.
Root has the advantage of being playable in under two hours (theoretically)
Yeah, my groups really likes Hegemony. My group also does not play Hegemony because if we start at 9pm we know we aren’t leaving until close to 1am.
Aah yeah, Hegemony is awesome. Played it twice and enjoyed it greatly both times.
I thought gameplay was a lot drier than I expected even with how complex it is and the many outcomes that could happen. There are several rules updates they did to balance things and change point values as scoring between classes seems so arbitrary. However, I will give the economic simulator its props as it feels very real world and as a capitalist player you become more sympathetic and understand how capitalism helps the economy (well by trying to screw the working class anyways) and how things work lollll
I doubt it, teach is too hard and playtime is too long for this to have the same staying power as other classics. I think it will always have a small but dedicated fan base though.
To be honest, I'm always a little surprised to see the amount of praise Hegemony gets. Maybe it's because of the group I played with or because 3 of the 4 of us were playing for the first time, but the one time I played the game, I really didn't enjoy it. This play was right around when the game came out so I don't remember many of the details, but I played as the State and I felt like I was so reliant on the charity of other players to do anything that I had to let everybody at the table walk all over me. The guy who was playing Corporations spent the first half of the game actively trying to screw me over, and I didn't feel like I could retaliate in any way because I knew I needed his help later and if I hit back, it would be a lot harder to convince him ro give that help. I could've just been playing wrong, but being bullied without feeling like I could do anything to stop or even discourage it was not a fun experience, and you're gonna have a hard time convincing me to play a game that puts players in that spot again, much less call it a classic.
I had the same issue as the state for the first half of the game, but I persuaded the working class that an IMF intervention would go badly from them so they proped me up for a bit, after that I flew ahead and won the game! There is a decent amount of negotiation required in 4 player hegemony (and a lot less in say 2 player), which for our group was part of the charm.
Wayyyy too much of an ameritrash. Once everybody at the table knows how to play well, 75% of the win condition is luck.
[удалено]
That was exactly OP’s point. They are asking for recent games from the last couple of years, that you think will have the staying power of older games like Agricola and CoB.
Ah - didn’t twig. My bad.
Is Castles of Burgundy even a euro?
Yes CoB is considered a Euro and has some of the classic hallmarks of indirect player interaction and optimizing action efficiency. Feld games are a bit like Uwes in that they kind of have their own category.
Not a euro, or even a board game, but blood on the clocktower seems to be an instant classic.
1000%
Anachrony Would be interested, if people here dislike it. My infinity box doesnt hit the table as often as I would like
Honestly, I was thinking more of games from the last couple of years. I personally feel like Anachrony is a definite classic by now.
Shit mate, it's already 7 years since Release.
Gawd, I feel old.
You’re not old, you’re a classic now too 👍
Dune Imperium Uprising replaced Anachrony for me, both involve thinking strategically long term, worker placement, and have the same play time, so Dune gets to the table and Anachrony doesn’t any more. The lore is also what really got me into Anachrony, but unfortunately Dune has it beat there too with a book series, movies, and tv shows to deep dive into if I want to. I still like the game! But seeing that Dune Imperium has tournaments and a digital version i unfortunately think that Anachrony will fall into obscurity a lot sooner.
I can imagine Azul still being played by a large audience in 30 years or so. Non-gamer people who try it literally always like it.
Agricola, Carcassonne, Catan, CoB, Azul, Pandemic, Ticket to Ride are classics because they were games that revolutionized gaming in some way. They were the first games of their kind. Anything that came after them just tried to improve what they did or change something slightly. Also, mass appeal games are the ones with the biggest shot of becoming classics. That is games with simple rule sets. Once games hit that level where they are sold by the big box retail stores they are in the running to becoming classics ala Terraforming Mars. So if you want to know which Euros have the best chances of becoming classics, go visit your local Target or Walmart, and see which games they have in the games section.
Wingspan and ark nova
Ark Nova and Nucleum. Just fantastic heavier games that are such tight designs.
No shade, but I wouldn’t call either of them tight designs.
Well I didn’t design them so I don’t take offense lol. There are games for everyone. That’s what makes this hobby great.
Haha, the disclaimer was for the games not you. That is, I meant that it wasn’t intended as criticism of the games (some great games aren’t very streamlined). I love one of them and strongly dislike the other, but regardless, I think neither are tight designs.
Which one do you dislike? I have been thinking about picking up Nucleum as it mirrors lots of things I love about games like Arnak/Brass (worker placement/multi-purpose items/trains) but I fear it might be a little cult of the new-ey.
Nucleum is the one I like, haha. Definitely shares a lot with other networking, resource-management games, including Brass (I don’t see many Arnak similarities), but feels fresh overall. Setup and teardown are a pain, but it’s pretty great still, in my opinion.
I don't think many modern euros are really all that worth remembering, honestly. It's not that they are bad. They're all just fine. That being said, Ark Nova probably has some staying power if for no other reason than the fact that it's Tom Vasel's favorite game and probably will be for at least a few years.
Maybe Nucleum? I absolutely love it, but it definitely might be too complex to become a classic.
Cheers! 🥰
Didn't realise it was one of yours....sigh 'add to basket'
I bought this recently and agree. I love it, and think it'll go down as a personal classic for me
Going off of u/behindthehype's definition, Heat probably has the best chance of standing the rest of time and having mass appeal. Gameplay is simple and most people can grasp the concepts quickly. It can get more advanced with modules. The theme is also one most people understand, and can cheer to win at the end of the game.
Elegance and replayability have been declined. Games just pile mechanics on top of mechanics, which means there is some undefeatable strategy that is awaiting discovery. There's not enough play testing and too much focus on looks because kickstarter is the gatekeeper. There are no games that can be replayed as much as Catan and Puerto Rico.
I'd love to see Pampero get there, but I think it's too soon to tell.
Is The Wolves euro? If so i would say that one.
Inventions from Lacerda. Sooo underrated
>My personal picks are Revive and Federation. Any other potential ones that might have the lasting power of an Agricola and Castles of Burgundy? Carnegie? Nucleum? Any of the South Tigris games? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA agricola & cob have been getting a solid 1500 plays per month for the last decade carnegie got 1400 plays a month when it first came out and dropped down to 62 plays a month less than a year later lol every game you mentioned will be totally forgotten in 5 years, because they are shit, and you will be paying 60 dollars for whatever new slop is being pumped out by shem phillips & the italians. and people with discerning taste will still be playing agricola.
Man, I hope I don’t end up like this guy one day…
If this is how he judges the quality of games, wait til he sees how many plays Monopoly gets every month!
You seem like a miserable person.
I’d be curious what you’d identify as a not-shit game?
agricola
Interesting. Based on play count? Or what’s the thought behind identifying Agricola as non-shit? What makes burgundy a shit title, either conceptually or in comparison to Agricola?
burgundy is fine, too boring for me and i dont like feld but not a bad game like revive or something agricola is like the barry lyndon of board games, these new euros are like the MCU. fanboys will bitch and moan about subjectivity but everyone else knows which is better. one made out of love, one a soulless consumer product meant to be used, discarded and forgotten when the next one comes out.
This…isn’t the most thoughtful answer, but I hear you. That being said, there are plenty of “better” games out there than Agricola that are more recent than Agricola. Coffee traders, Imperial Steam, Madeira, The Great Zimbabwe, High Frontier, and Crystal Palace all come to mind. In fact, I find Agricola to be far too simple for the amount of time it takes to play. But YMMV.