Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[TrojH]

David Sirlin took Texas Hold'em Poker, changed the size of the deck (6 suits, 10 ranks), changed some of the poker hands, added variable player powers (since Sirlin thinks that every game should have variable player powers), slapped on a panda theme, and called it Pandante.

The Kickstarter for this stinker opened today. Check it out here.

Actually, I don't think it looks like a stinker at all. But I know you guys love to unleash some good Sirlin-hate, and I won't stand in the way. 

[Kirian]

This makes me a sad panda.  Why?

Because a gambling game involving pandas has the potential to be awesome sauce, but Sirlin had to force it into standard poker.  Even worse, Texas Hold'em, the worst form of poker.

Fun fact: my autocorrect tried to change Sirlin to Sirloin.  He probably gets that a lot.

[qmech]

This is too easy!

Blivand is a high fashion designer who likes remove all the elements of a design that he can without hurting the functionality, and then to remove some more. I think that really shows

[Ozle]

I don't know who that person is but this looks stupid.

Also, look at the costs for what is actually just a pack of cards (and some player aids)

Also, seriously, Panda's are not cool/cute/fun unless you are a 14 year old girl (possibly 15, and it goes down as far as you like, but not above 15)

Mists of Pandaren makes me weep!

[Kirian]

Yeah, 70-ish cards for $35 is not so hot compared to Dominion at $45 for 500 cards.

But they were designed by some semi-famous fashion designer dude!  So that's... useless, too.

Mists of Pandaren makes me weep!

Pandaria is awesome, panda ninjas are awesome, and anyone who says otherwise is not awesome.

[Ozle]

I put off buying Dominion for ages because it was just a bunch of cards. Obviously I know a lot of background work went into it, and I am glad I did, but still when you are jsut browsing a shop and see games with hundreds of compontents, and one with 'just' a bunch of cards.


And we'll have to disagree on pandas, or I'll have to give my rather boring rant on why Panda's should just be allowed to die off with no fuss.

[Warfreak2]

He characterises Poker as primarily about bluffing, which suggests he doesn't know very much about poker.

[jonts26]

Or he just watches televised poker, where the bluff to not bluff ratio they show is obscenely high.

[popsofctown]

He characterises Poker as primarily about bluffing, which suggests he doesn't know very much about poker.

Probably is just using bluffing in a broad sense.  If you allow for reversing the polarity, every play besides betting the odds exactly is a bluff.  Sort of.

If you're arguing he's not a poker pro, of course he's not.  He only reaches a passing familiarity with every game before he rips it off.  Hasn't played with most Dominion cards, admits to little mastery of chess, and not a PTQ level player at MTG either although he intends to do that one somewhere down the line.

[Tables]

What makes me really sad about this is that Rodney Smith, from WatchItPlayed, seems to do a lot of demoing and trialing for Sirlin stuff. WIP is really cool, but I really dislike what Sirlin does to the gaming industry.

[Warfreak2]

If you're arguing he's not a poker pro, of course he's not.  He only reaches a passing familiarity with every game before he rips it off.

I was more arguing pretty much what you just said.

[Grujah]

If you're arguing he's not a poker pro, of course he's not.  He only reaches a passing familiarity with every game before he rips it off.  Hasn't played with most Dominion cards, admits to little mastery of chess, and not a PTQ level player at MTG either although he intends to do that one somewhere down the line.

Everybody is PTQ level at MTG. PT, that's a different story


(Edit: for non-MTGers: PT is Pro Tour (what pops prolly meant, highest level of MTG competition, invites only) while PTQ is Pro Tour Qualifier (and everybody is eligible)

[Titandrake]

I interpret PTQ level as a reasonable contender for winning a PTQ, rather than a participant.

[theory]

He characterises Poker as primarily about bluffing, which suggests he doesn't know very much about poker.

Probably is just using bluffing in a broad sense.  If you allow for reversing the polarity, every play besides betting the odds exactly is a bluff.  Sort of.

If you're arguing he's not a poker pro, of course he's not.  He only reaches a passing familiarity with every game before he rips it off.  Hasn't played with most Dominion cards, admits to little mastery of chess, and not a PTQ level player at MTG either although he intends to do that one somewhere down the line.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

[Warfreak2]

As I say, every day is another independent verification of the Dunning-Kruger effect.

[Kirian]

As I say, every day is another independent verification of the Dunning-Kruger effect.

Yeah, I bet you think you're an expert on the Dunning-Kruger effect.  I bet most of you feel that way.

[popsofctown]

I am an expert on the Dunning-Krugar effect.

[blueblimp]

There is nothing I've thought about that I know I don't know about the Dunning-Kruger effect.