C Paget
Canada
Toronto
ON
...
-
Set is a pattern-recognition race game, in a portable card format. It is recommended by Mensa, which usually denotes a dry abstract game focused more on “smart” activities than on actual gameplay (IMHO); but Set is more than the Mensa-label: it’s a good little brainteaser of a game.
Subscribe here: Radar Review Announcement Geeklist
Value: Is it worth the price?
10
Set is both cheap, and awesome; well worth the price.
Variety: Is each play different?
1
There is next to no variety in the game. Technically, the luck of the cards provides variety within the layout: sometime the layout will be easier or harder. But the gameplay never changes: each round feels the same and each game feels the same.
Actually, different games may feel different, depending on how awake your brain is – but this is a bit of a tangent...
Replayability: Can you play again & again?
6
This one really depends on who’s playing. If it’s an even match between engaged players, then you can expect Set to be played a few times in a row and then to hit the table again soon.
But if you have a runaway leader, or if the game is too taxing for some players, then it’s unlikely to see a lot of replay.
Also, regardless of the players, this is a game that you need to be “in the right mood” to play, which can limit it’s replayability because not every day is a Set day.
Overall, Set will be infinitely replayable with the right group; but with the wrong group, not so much.
Slow to Master: Experience to move beyond rules?
4
I would say that it takes a few games for most people to really start understanding the game, and to come up with techniques for how to find the Sets fastest. And once you really understand the rules, it’s just a matter of improving your skill through practice.
Obviously, some people will “get” this game much faster than others.
Strategic Depth: Opportunity for decision-making?
2
There is really no long-term strategy in set, nor are there any real short-term tactics to employ. It’s a game of skill, with only a few different search techniques possible: methods for systematically searching the cards, or even just staring at them until something pops up...
Player Interaction: Contact between players?
1
The is almost exclusively multi-player solitaire. There are no turns, and the only way to effect your opponents is to find a set faster than them. So opponents act as “timers,” forcing you to search very quickly, other than that – your opponents don’t even need to be there. (And yes, Set is great for solitaire play.)
Fun: An enjoyable experience?
4
Set is a brainteaser more than anything else, and you have to be ready to be tested!
I’d say that it’s enjoyable for a quick moment after you find a set, but during the gameplay you are too focused to really “enjoy” the experience.
Luck-Free: Is winning independent of luck?
10
This is a game of skill: the person who wins is the one who was best at finding sets. The results may change from day to day, as people will be more focused etc, but it’s not luck-driven.
Theme Fit: Does it match the theme?
5
Set is an abstract game, no theme required.
As my scale doesn’t have an N/A value, I rated it as a 5 because it’s the midpoint of the scale.
Gateway: Is it good with non-gamers?
3
Set is a bad choice for non-gamers, unless you are 100% sure that the non-gamer would enjoy a pattern-recognition brainteaser.
The majority of non-gamers will comment that Set feels like a pop quiz, which will make it harder to introduce them to other games. So I recommend starting with something else as a gateway.
It was pointed out in a comment below that Set is a much better gateway game when you are playing with kids. Which I could definitely see being the case.
Rules A-OK: Confirming it isn’t broken?
10
Rules are perfect. No changes needed.
Teachable : Is it easy to teach?
6
There isn’t a lot to explain, and the explanation is easier if you go through a few examples.
But there is definitely a subset of the population that has a very hard time understanding the concept, and more explanation doesn’t necessarily help. So that can make Set an exceptionally frustrating game to teach.
Least Text etc: Minimal Reading/Symbology?
10
This was a very difficult game to rate for "Least Text etc." Originally I gave it a 3 because it's very symbol-heavy, but I also noted that this rating should be taken with a large grain of salt because the symbols aren't slowing down gameplay because they ARE the gameplay.
dagibbs disagreed with my original rating, in a comment below. He pointed out that an image is only a symbol when it conveys information, and in set:
dagibbs wrote: You don't have to look at the picture/icon/whatever and translate it to meaning.
I think that this is a much better way of understanding the imagery in Set and so I'm changing my rating to a 10 - entirely text-free.
Short Set-Up: Does it set-up quickly?
10
Superfast set-up: shuffle cards and then deal them out into a 3 by 4 grid.
Components: Are the bits high quality?
8
The components are simply cards, but they are very high quality cards. I’ve had my copy for a while, and played it in a variety of settings (including outdoors), and they are holding up beautifully.
Bottom Line
I have two main opinions when it comes to recommending Set:
1) I highly recommend Set for groups of people who would relish the challenge of pitting their pattern-recognition skills against others, especially if all players are relatively evenly matched.
2) I do not recommend Set for groups of people who are looking for a casual and relaxed game, especially if there are a variety of comfort levels or skill levels with brainteasers.
Edits:
- I added content to the "Gateway" blurb to discuss kids.
- And I re-wrote the "Least Text etc" blurb, changing the rating from a 3 to a 10 because the interpretation was off (also updated the graph).
Thanks to dagibbs and Randy Cox for their comments and suggestions.
-
Andy Andersen
United States
Newark
Delaware
-
Fairly short review with a lot of information. Enjoyed it. Thanks.
-
Randy Cox
United States
Clemson
South Carolina
1024x768 works just fine - Don't Wide the Site!
The Back Alley gets no respect.
-
I think I would bump up the Gateway rating. While it's true that it may be only about a 3 for old, crotchety, adult non-gamers, it's an exceptional gateway game for kids. They take to it quickly and then kick around the adults, eventually leading into playing some of the parents' games. Gateway!
-
David Gibbs
United States
Ypsilanti
Michigan
-
I would disagree on your rating for reading/symbols. There is no reading or symbols. Obviously there is no reading -- there are no words. But there are shapes -- but those shapes aren't symbols. A symbol is a shape that stands for something. Race for the Galaxy would be a game with a lot of symbols -- each of the little shapes means some action. In Set, they don't have any meaning -- three red filled squiggles doesn't MEAN anything, therefore it isn't a symbol. You don't have to look at the picture/icon/whatever and translate it to meaning.
It is image heavy, yes, but not symbol. I would put it a 10 on this -- no symbols and no reading.
-
C Paget
Canada
Toronto
ON
...
-
dagibbs wrote: I would disagree on your rating for reading/symbols.
...
In Set, [the shapes] don't have any meaning -- three red filled squiggles doesn't MEAN anything, therefore it isn't a symbol. You don't have to look at the picture/icon/whatever and translate it to meaning.
Very good point.
I think that I was dancing around this issue a bit, as I was very tempted to say that the symbology scale was non-applicable to set. I think that the brain-burning nature of the game really influenced my rating, but that really isn't related to the imagery itself.
I will edit my review now, and I hope that you don't mind me referring to your comment because I think you put it very succinctly.
Randy Cox wrote: While it's true that it may be only about a 3 [on the gateway rating] for old, crotchety, adult non-gamers, it's an exceptional gateway game for kids.
I would agree with this too, and I think that kids are more adventurous than adults when it comes to trying brain teasers. Adults a bit fearful of looking "stupid" which is very unfortunate.
I'm going to leave my rating as-is, because I think that my points are accurate for adult non-gamers, but I will add a sentence to point out that kids might be a better audience (and reference your comment).
-
David Gibbs
United States
Ypsilanti
Michigan
-
tathta wrote:
I will edit my review now, and I hope that you don't mind me referring to your comment because I think you put it very succinctly.
Nope, don't mind you referring to my comment.
-
|
|
Posted Fri May 27, 2011 4:55 pm
