The 4 Squares Review - Unsettled 

I actually wondered the same! Between him saying his favorite play was the live play and others saying how nice it is to have another person to solve the puzzle with I really think that impacted his rating.

Yes, I agree. O-Neb stated that the core principal in creating the game was to explore the concept of teamwork and team dynamics in a stressful environment. I think it is very likely to be a better experience multiplayer as opposed to playing multi-handed solo. It's about the group problem-solving dynamic and player interaction as much or more than a pure strategy game. Still can see even multiplayer why it might not be a game that works for what Tom is looking for from the game but don't think solo is the best way to experience the game.

Of course the more logical conclusion is that the game is just not for him.

@@nerzenjaeger I mean both can be true. The two points don’t have to be mutually exclusive. It’s completely fine that he didn’t like the game and gave some good reasons why he didn’t like it. I appreciate his thoughts, just saying I wonder if him playing mostly solo had an impact.

It highly depends on what you're used to. If you mostly solo games, I don't think this would be a problem, but if you enjoy more the brainstorming aspect of cooperation, solo might be lacking. And I say this as someone who played this solo only, but I have experience with similar games multiplayer too and yes, if you enjoy cooperation, this will lack something solo. But that being said if you're used to solo puzzle games, there's no problem here playing 2 characters. And with the question of "ideal playercount", there's not one per se. The tasks are done in a way that some of them are easier with more players, some are easier with fewer players. There's this delicate balance of number of actions per game per player and being able to cover more ground. Cause with more players, you cover more ground more "quickly" while not compromising your group, while splitting as 2 people might be very detrimental. But you get more turns, so you can compensate to an extend. The only limitation in the playercount I think is just your preference. More minds know more, but less minds can do more :)

I have Unsettled and backed ISS as well. I think there are exploration and survival aspects in both. I feel the difference is that ISS is primarily a narrative driven campaign game and Unsettled is scenario based puzzle game with a light story / space setting. I do agree though that I think ISS will have a stronger "exploration" vibe and Unsettled definitely has a win/lose "survival" vibe.

I’m usually not a solo gamer. However, I played my first game of Unsettled solo and LOVED it. The two handed puzzle with an enjoyable dialogue made for a great solo experience and one of my favorite games of the year so far. I still like it better as a 2 player game but I feel that way about most all games. You can pick this one up with confidence.

I agree 2 hours is about the max time I want to put into a game at one time. The sweetspot for me personally is about 1 hour. I don’t mind luck in a game if it is short enough, but the longer the game is the more frustrating it can McBean if you are beaten by luck and not poor decision making. I agree with Tom that I don’t want to be demoralized in a game. I play games for the fun of it and for me it should be challenging not punishing. For me although the theme is intriguing but based on the playthroughs and description I don’t think this would be my type of game. Thanks again guys for another entertaining review.

It's great. I've played it with 2 different groups and we had a blast. All want to play it again. The game looks as good as you expect from Orange Nebula and offers a good mix of puzzle solving and incidental storytelling. I don't necessarily need more ON games in my life, but Vindication and Unsettled both offer interesting and different challenges and are here to stay.

Yeah a small editing error from the oltree review yeah?

They have a pretty similar feel, especially if you're playing Unsettled with 2. I'd say the planets in Unsettled feel a little more hostile than Far Away. There are times in Far Away where I feel like we have things under control, that feeling is much less common in Unsettled. Unsettled has wider variety in mission objectives, but that means it can be harder to know what the right moves are from game to game. On the other hand, there is definitely more cooperation and table talk in Unsettled since it doesn't have the communication blackout mechanic that Far Away does. All that said, they do have a lot in common, I imagine most people who like one would like the other.

I suspect Zee might have rated it even lower than Tom. During the playthrough you could tell the game was bothering him. He was often asking "What do you want me to do? / Just tell me what to do."

I think waiting for the "right kind" of breakthrough, anomaly, etc. is the wrong way to play this game. Each time you get a breakthrough, you have to change the way you play to maximize your use of each benefit. You have to adapt: if you sit around waiting for the perfect thing to pop into your lap you will lose. If the map tiles are arranged in a difficult way, see how you can take an alternate route or use your abilities to take shortcuts. The different cards in each box are designed to help you solve the puzzle for each planet: it's not random! I've played a few times now, and every time we've lost we could trace back a few decisions we could have made differently and won. Sure there are card flips and die rolls, but I think there is less randomness than in, say, Pandemic, where you can literally have lost the game before you even begin.

@@cbazler I appreciate your view of the game, that you are able to find enjoyment in it. For me, though, I've played it enough to know that there are very specific anomalies or Keywords required to accomplish the tasks of the stories. If you don't get them from the Investigations right away, or have them already by the time they're required, it can mean a complete loss. Examples: 1. In one game, I found our one survivor stuck in a corner of the map that had been investigated out, and we had to wait for the other survivor who had the right keyword to make it to that side to complete an objective. 2. Another game, I had it where unless I'm pumping out charges to pay for ignoring time on card edges, there's no way to complete an objective before time runs out. 3. In still another game, the arrangement of planet cards had us all hit with distresses, morale lowered, and focus taken away on our first round. Not the best introduction to the mission. We won, but it was only because we happened to have the right hallucination, ship power, and upgrade to mix together to get the last person back. If even one of those hadn't been there, the last few turns were useless. Like I said, I know it's there in other games that I enjoy, even total randomness and yet I still have fun. Pandemic: The Cure is one of my top favorite games, and you want to talk about randomness? Yikes, it's terrible there, yet it doesn't bother me. I have fun with the randomness. This one hit me differently, and felt more "scripted" or had specific requirements I needed to meet in order to work out the puzzle. It just made it no fun for me, or any of the people I played with. And we won 1/2 to 3/4 of the games we played. I'm glad other people enjoy the game, there's a lot of great ideas and mechanisms involved that make it a unique experience that everyone should be able to try out. But it would not surprise me if this is the kind of game that is very divisive. You either love it, or you really don't care about playing it again (I won't say love it or hate it because I don't hate the game, I just have no desire to ever play it again). So, long story short? Have fun with Unsettled @C Bazler! I'll be over here having fun with something else, lol.

I have played several of the scenarios a couple times each, and I can say I have enjoyed them equally on repeated play. This is mostly due to the interactions with whom I am playing. Knowing the “trick” of the scenario does tend to make it somewhat easier, but not enough to impact gameplay. If you were only playing solo, or with the same gaming group, I could see this making replay of the same planet/scenario less engaging. But with 18 scenarios available (soon 15 more) this should not be a huge concern.

Top review is always the seal. There have been 3 6s and an 8.5 and an excellence seal given

Tom gave this game a 5 and it got a seal of excellence. it only takes 1 of them to love it for it to get a seal. merchants cove was another recent-ish example.

Remember their Rating system is based on the highest rating given by a member of the dice tower whether the review is solo or a 4 squares review. 4 Squares is there to give some more points of view on a game. Which I really like, but doesn't change the fact that the highest rating will determine a seal of Approval/Excellence.

Yep, it's a 5, that's what I got after hearing everything.

Out of these four reviewers (plus Zee), my tastes line up least with Tom. When he's being a contrarian, I'm even less likely to agree with him.

@@christophermoore8524 I think Tom wasn't trying to be anything. If anything he was being nice to the publisher, and as Tom can do, understand a game may be good for others even though he didn't like it. Tom admitted he's sick of overly hard coop's, and in this era of boardgaming who can blame him?

@@MattD007 but thats like criticising a game for what you want it to be rather than what it is

@@atomiccritter6492 you can also be positive on a game for what you want it to be. I watched the winter spectacular where Zee and Tom brought it up and Zee agreed with Tom after the fact. I just think the Four Square reviews are a tad too tame.

I think the lends to the thought that playing solo increases your chances of not seeing a creative solution. Excellent idea to breakdown the lab and build it in a better spot. By yourself, you might never think of that.

I only have 5 plays under my belt, but often when it came down to needing to do the impossible with no time left, there was always a creative solution. I'm sure the won't be 100% but this game gives you the tools to do it. I'm pretty sure, like yourself, Tom missed those opportunities. And I believe the star rating isn't difficulty, it's complexity in regards to the rules. So a 5 star rating can be easier than a 2 star rating

That really only happens if you're playing poorly. (I suspect Tom may have been playing poorly)

Honestly it plays more like pandemic with flavor text.

That's the issue for these 4 Square reviews. Some of the panel likes certain games to a fault in my opinion.

@@MattD007 don't think that's a problem as the members are supposed to contrast, presenting a variety of perspectives. imo they aren't different enough, where tom, zee and sam often were

@@gordo6908 Sam, Zee and Tom were a great trio because they were so contrasted. I also believe they were honest and called out bad games even if in their wheelhouse. I don't feel the same for Mike, Roy and company. They give a nice thorough playthrough and are candid about their thoughts, but their overall opinions are too cookie cutter. I think the panel has also gotten soft and apologize too much. We have Rahdo for that, and a whole bunch of KS wannabe reviewers like Tantrum House who never bad mouth a game. I like Dice Tower cause they can call a bad game a bad game, even if I disagree with them.

@@gordo6908 Dice Tower ironically needs a lass gamer type of gamer in the mix - dont know how they could pull that off though

Ghost Stories is 12 years old. Tom is getting tired of ridiculously hard puzzle coop games. I don't see the contradiction.

@@MythicosQc74 sorry, I wasn't trying to say it was a contradiction. Obviously he has a reason for liking one over the other. Personally watching the playthrough I wasn't really interested in this game anyway. Basically wondering if his changing view is retroactive and if not, what does Ghost Stories do better/different to become thing he enjoys? Either way is fine, just curious.

@@keel1701 Ghost Stories is a lighthearted game that doesn't take 2h. I think this is the main reason.

Yeah, that’s a great word for the writing in this. Thanks!

@@michaeldilisio557 Thanks for your excellent-as-always overview and review 👍

We played it with 2 so far and it was an amazing experience 🤩 I could see the downtime being a bummer sometimes with 4 players, but we'll see 😅

Helpful to know. Thanks!

It doesn't punish you for exploring (in fact, you NEED to explore to find laboratories and discover anomalies that will help you win). The point is that you still need to focus primarily on the objectives, and time is very tight, so you have to explore in moderation.

It's more interesting when exploring is not some automatic thing you should always be doing. You have to think if you can/need to explore.

My review doesn't have anything to do with a seal of excellence or not. Any reviewer on the Dice Tower can give out that seal.

@@thedicetower I stand corrected! I mean no offence Tom, just ribbing. :)

Ultimately, I feel like a lot of his gripe is from playing solo. I've played this game a few times now, the difference I see is that it is easier to rush down the game at 2 players, but with 4 you can get the extra stuff done that really brings out the extra actions. I love the game, quite likely AT LEAST my top 5 for co-ops. I do not think I ever agree with Tom, he just seems like he likes very SPECIFIC games.

Nobody’s opinion is wrong. If you don’t want opinions that may differ from yours, don’t come to an opinion channel

@@ESCTom Tom is wrong is a video they do on this channel where the opinion of Tom being wrong is the point. Not every game is for every person.

@@ESCTom of course opinions can be wrong...

Ah, but I've really cooled on RC over the last few years, so it makes more sense.

I agree completely that if a game promotes itself as a solo experience it should make every effort to make that experience as potent as the multiplayer. In the case of Unsettled though it was conceived completely as a multiplayer game and marketed as such. CAN you play multi handed solo? Totally. I've done it a bunch and have had a lot of fun, but it is very much a multiplayer game about collaboration and would never be marketed as a solo game - that was not its intent. :-)

@@tommattson3145 So you're saying Unsettled doesn't officially support solo? In that case Tom shouldn't have reviewed the game at all.

@@corvus418 Tom didn’t play the game solo exclusively. He played it multiplayer on one of our live streams.

My favorite part of pandemic is searching for Anomalies and managing my focus cubes. Maybe we didn't explain all our points well enough, but there's plenty unique in this game that makes it very fun for us. And it's okay that it's not for everyone.

Or possibly I don't try to in a review. Why would you hide it other than for dramatic effect?

@@thedicetower I do like a dramatic reveal! I am surprised Tom didn't like the game, but I thought you explained your thoughts well. There is definitely an issue with games giving a weird disconnect with them. I did't care for Legends of Andor for a similar reason.

I guess you pegged me. I don't think this game is a failure, just not what I'm looking for.

I would argue the score is irrelevant to his description of how he felt about the game. I would rate Gloomhaven a 4, but I fully recognize is a great game, just not for me.

@@npckse8508 Exactly. I can recognize great gameplay mechanics in a game creating a smooth gameplay experience and STILL not enjoy the game. The rating I give a game isn't JUST one aspect, it's a mix of multiple aspects of the game from the rulebook to the artwork and everything in between. A prime example for me is the game Great Western Trail, I can recognize that it's a well designed game but I just don't enjoy it, hence a lower rating from me.