This week on XBLA in Brief, we check out Lost Cities. For a game about exciting adventures and expeditions, it sure plays an awful lot like solitaire. Competitive solitaire. And guess what: it's actually really, really fun. Who knew? Check out the video above and learn why card and board game fans should definitely try Lost Cities.
[iTunes] Subscribe to X3F TV directly in iTunes. [Zune] Subscribe to the X3F TV directly (Zune Marketplace link coming soon). [RSS] Add the X3F TV feed to your RSS aggregator and have the show delivered automatically. [M4V] Download the M4V directly.
1. IT IS NOT SOLITAIRE. Period. If you want to describe it, it's sort of a card version of Rack-O. Stop listening to Tycho on Penny Arcade, whom I suggest you not listen to regarding casual games.
2. There's a TON of strategy. Playing newbs online, they tend to:
a. play everything - can't do that b. discard cards I can use - can't do that c. not pick up discarded cards - can't do that
3. It's not boring, especially if you play the original card game. It's quite addictive, especially since it's fast-paced.
It is a bit like solitaire, in that it has cards. It is a really good game though and deep, despite the simple rules. Basically more people should buy it because at the moment only people who know the actual card game seem to be playing online - that's my excuse for being repeatedly beaten anyway.
My wife bought the card game for us for Xmas and we've had a lot of fun with it. I downloaded it from XBLA yesterday and I have to ask why are the cards so freak'n small on the screen? There's a lot of dead space on the screen. Why not give it a presentation like Uno or something? Plus, the artwork on the real cards looks so much better than the XBLA version.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Granteezy @ Apr 25th 2008 7:47PM
Is it that difficult to publish decent games on XBLA? IMO there hasn't been a game worth purchasing since N+.
PerfectStrategy @ Apr 26th 2008 9:52AM
A person might respond to such a comment with the word "Ikaruga".
Mark @ Apr 25th 2008 11:21PM
N+ wasn't worth purchasing.
Tony @ Apr 25th 2008 7:50PM
Some would say this is a "decent" game. Can't please everyone every week, I guess.
vidGuy @ Apr 26th 2008 2:28AM
The demo is too simple for me to be interested in it as a $10 game. I could see being bored with this after a few minutes.
N+ definitely wasn't worth its price either, IMO.
Jonah Falcon @ Apr 26th 2008 12:14PM
1. IT IS NOT SOLITAIRE. Period. If you want to describe it, it's sort of a card version of Rack-O. Stop listening to Tycho on Penny Arcade, whom I suggest you not listen to regarding casual games.
2. There's a TON of strategy. Playing newbs online, they tend to:
a. play everything - can't do that
b. discard cards I can use - can't do that
c. not pick up discarded cards - can't do that
3. It's not boring, especially if you play the original card game. It's quite addictive, especially since it's fast-paced.
(sigh) Where are the adults in the house?
Richard Mitchell @ Apr 26th 2008 1:23PM
I never said it was solitaire. I said it was like solitaire. Which it is. Period.
It's not the same. But it's similar. And frankly, I think the masses would get a solitaire reference a little more easily than Rack-O.
lord sunjata @ Apr 26th 2008 3:37PM
It is a bit like solitaire, in that it has cards. It is a really good game though and deep, despite the simple rules. Basically more people should buy it because at the moment only people who know the actual card game seem to be playing online - that's my excuse for being repeatedly beaten anyway.
Fezmid @ Apr 26th 2008 4:34PM
My wife bought the card game for us for Xmas and we've had a lot of fun with it. I downloaded it from XBLA yesterday and I have to ask why are the cards so freak'n small on the screen? There's a lot of dead space on the screen. Why not give it a presentation like Uno or something? Plus, the artwork on the real cards looks so much better than the XBLA version.
That said, the game does rock.