Word Cube (new game on Paragon)

[Ernest W. Quality]

I finally found a Paragon with this on it today. I agree with UP, it seems over complicated. The faces are too small, too much accuracy required. A lot of machines screens are slightly skew anyway. If they were a bit bigger (i.e. less of them).

I also found there were too many options when making a word, that it took longer to see whether you could extend to a longer word. So probably the best bet is to really hack with words of length6 or below.

It doesn't seem to accept FART either.

[fotherz]

I'll keep an eye open.

But if its just a stab-a-thon, I cant see it holding my attention (although it may provide easy wins for the word uppers amongst us).

[Guest]

I see you're getting in your excuses early then, Ernest, Fotherz, UP

Too many options, Ernest?! Is it making your brain hurt? Aww...

[Ernest W. Quality]

The other thing is, if it's not going to be on the majority of machines (which it isn't, round my way at least), it's not as helpful to be good at it. Esp as you're unlikely to make any real money out of it after the first or second go or (just like WU).

[Guest]

The other thing is, if it's not going to be on the majority of machines (which it isn't, round my way at least), it's not as helpful to be good at it. Esp as you're unlikely to make any real money out of it after the first or second go or (just like WU).

Another excuse?!

[Ernest W. Quality]

Furthermore, everyone knows only faggots and sailors play word games. I'd far rather be pimping it in da groinwagon (as my vote indicates).

[Istenem]

Art is born of constraint and dies of freedom.

Ah, les mots justes.


clearing on WU is a science. playing elegantly, as Ernest says, is art.

[Guest]

Art is born of constraint and dies of freedom.

Ah, les mots justes.

clearing on WU is a science. playing elegantly, as Ernest says, is art.

I'm damned if I can see how Ernest's comment justifies yours, UP - unless the 'constraint' you struggle with at WU is an inability to think tactically enough to clear.

Besides this, I fail to see how playing to clear the grid is less elegant than playing for nice words.

In fact, I would say that Ernest's saying is more supportive of clearing, as the need to clear is the 'constraint' that restraints more mindless players' tendencies towards self-imposed 'stylistic' concerns ie. logorrhea.

That he said the above to criticise the sprawling palette of Word Cube proves my point.

[Barry Trotter]

Having played WC in a pub this afternoon on the way back from Wales, i'd suggest that anyone playing it does so in a group of two or three - reason being - as there are so many visible tiles, its not always easy to do it on your own. With three of you, as long as you take it in turns properly, you can do quite well. We got nowhere near any money - the jackpot was around 5450 - but its not a bad game. I prefer it to WU cos i can make far more words, and i feel like i'm getting a better game. Also, the shuffle and help are actually helpful - far more so than WU, and it seems to have a ridiculously large dictionary on it - i was putting in words i didn't even think existed to try and clear tiles, and it was accepting them!! Also, you can strategically play to clear certain tiles, so you can get to the pink ones (the ones that add time on, like Q, J and Z). God knows if its clearable - and whether anything happens if you do it - not had long enough on it. Anyone know if its done by the same people as WU?

[Guest]

Anyone know if its done by the same people as WU?

Dunno for sure - but I suspect not, as the developers of WU seem to have a distinctive in-house style. Whereas Mad Money Mah Jong has look about it that evokes WU, IMHO WC doesn't.

[Istenem]

WC is made by eclipse.
played it (only twice) yesterday and i wasn't massively impressed, it's good but not worth gushing about. sorry.
i found it very fiddly and there is a certain combination whereby you can see but can't access one of the blocks (even with your slenderest pinkie AKA baby small).
i can understand the appeal but will it be broad enough? also the prize structure seemed prohibitive.

i really don't like the * (in much the same way as i don't like blanks in scrabble but you don't have the option of throwing them away)
i'm not too proud to say that my highscore was a feeble 960.
a straw poll of two games is hardly conclusive but most players don't play the things as much as we do so they might form the same impression as i did.

but i hope you are right BT, if joe public plays it i am pretty confident i could have his money off him. but i do wish GWHL would ditch the dross from paragons; you still see non-prize games on screens and i can't believe any mug plays them, so they can't get any revenue at all.

a good trend i notice is the longer name allowed by the scoreboard, not just for the Bobs' graffitiing but also casual players who can call themselves DAVID BAXTER or whatever for bragging rights purposes.
the cops and robbers game (see other thread) has this too.

and re EWQ/VB and art: perhaps i misinterpreted the sentiment, my take is that art is personal so i guess you can neither be right nor wrong about it (but by the way i am always right (even when i'm mrong :wink )

[Ernest W. Quality]

I wonder if your average player will think this is easier or harder than WU.

[Istenem]

harder. and imo much less rewarding. i only play this game for the money and don't get any real satisfaction or enjoyment from playing it. while the £5 is easy to get and prizes up to £10, £15 and £20 by no means impossible, it is has very little to do with words and everything to do with speed and memory of which tlws are allowed. shouldn't grumble but damn it, i do.

there seem to be a few more paragons/gamesboxes springing up lately some of them replacing itboxes. i'm all for this.

[fotherz]

Bummed one of these in Canary Wharf yesterday.

Kerching.