Skyline is more of a puzzle game than a genuine board game. It’s one of the many brood given birth by the Tethyan Knizia.
Gameplay
You have a grid of varying sizes. You have a range of buildings and possibly parks with a number of stories from one to four. You are to arrange these buildings in a certain way so that no column or row has more than one building of the same height, and so that certain numerical signifiers on the edge of that grid match up with that configuration.
These numerical signifiers indicate a position on the edge of the grid, or from a position in the middle where there is a point of view that can only see a certain number of buildings in the relevant direction. Buildings of higher heights block buildings of lower heights. The puzzle is to match these up.
The game starts off fairly simple, with small grid configurations, and fewer variables. With each successful grid, you are shuttled to the next with an increasing order of complexity and requirements. By the time you’ve completed the apprenticeship you have been incrementally introduced to the games complexities and are ready for the game experience in total.
Implementation
[Edit: due to popular demand here is my review of the implementation.]
As a game, it ticks most of the boxes for a Knizia implementation. It uses good three-dimensional graphics that you can slide around with your fingers to ensure you can view the grid from any angle. It’s a useful implementation that often comes in handy when the grid extends outside of the line of sight. In general the user interface is intuitive. Beyond that there is nothing exceptional about the user interface or graphics to comment on, they do their job adequately.
There is also a clear opportunity to hit people up for money as there is a hint button that gives you the answer to one space on the grid. Better choose your timing on this, because you only get three hints for free, the rest cost real money. It smacks of freemium style games, so that entirely depends on whether that’s worth your while. Noticeably though, if you use the hint and close the window or change views the entire grid resets and your hint is wasted.
Commentary
Rather than revising my litany against Knizia at this point, I’ll simply point out that I made a long statement about quality over quantity. Whether this is substantiated by market forces is not for me to conjecture about but maybe it says something about the market expectations that such a strategy can produce reasonable returns. That being said, this game seems to be somewhere on par with the standard I’ve expected from Knizia. It’s quick, cheap and I lost interest in about ten minutes of play. In fact it took me the better part of the month to write this review because there’s nothing really to add to Knizia games that I haven’t already commented on in one form or another. I think maybe in the future I should draft some kind of generic Knizia review response and simply cut and paste for each Knizia review. After all why should I be putting major effort into reviewing these games when so little real investment has gone into them in the first place?
That being said, this game clearly sits on the outside edge of what could be defined as a board game and setting a good pace into the territory of puzzle gaming. At least it’s not repeating the horrible mistake of Tiny Token Empires, where it sets itself up to be one type of game but is ultimately an entirely different kind. I think it’s a shame because there are clearly signs of good development. The animations are smooth, the user interface is intuitive, but the Knizia games are amongst the first that made me feel like playing a game was a chore, not a past-time.
Verdict
3/10: Ultimately, what I’m saying is that the game only just passes the muster and I will no longer be reviewing a Knizia game just because it has game-like features. I will only be reviewing Knizia games that are based on a real physical board game, or could legitimately be accepted as a board game in the Eurogamer/strategy gamer circuit.
Skyline,Review By: Angelus Morningstar
Completed a Masters of Jurisprudence at University of Sydney. I am an activist, dramaturge, and instigator of strange mind experiments.
I’m a storyteller, and I mostly tell stories about people. These aren’t always stories you’ll find written down, they can be stories told over a coffee, told by firelight, told through art act and lifestyle. Of course, we all tell stories. We love our little fictions, lies and dreams – I just like to embellish a bit more than most.
My current project of substantial size is called Eidolon. It can be found here:
http://www.eidolon.me
Hi Nick, thanks for your input. Fact is, I am one of two reviewers here. However, I am not afraid of sticking to my biases. I have in my head a very clear idea of what makes a good game, and the worst thing that this website could become is just another opportunity to pander to companies that make games. I tend to err on the critical side partly because I see so many reviews giving glowing reviews while overlooking serious flaws. Yes, I'm more critical than the average consumer, but the assumption that it's driving away customers is also flawed. The number of hits this website is receiving has been consistently increasing over the last few months. Additionally, you claim that I'm completely the opposite time and time again. If you compare the aggregate score against my reviewer score (and I've put this in a chart) of all the games I reviewed, you'll find that there's an average deviation of 0.67; which means on average I tend to rate games 0.67 of a point less than the general public. Nevertheless, I'm not trying to guess what popular opinion thinks of this game, if that's what this website should do it would just be a meta-critic score. So I'm not sure exactly what sort of cracks you mean. Oh and if you remove all review that have less than 10 rankings, that deviation shrinks to 0.41; and if you remove all games with a less than 20 rankings, it shrinks to 0.29. Lastly, if you remove all games that have received at least 50 ranking, that deviation shrinks to 0.17. The critical view that I try to present is one that holds games accountable to a certain standard. No game is going to get more than a 5 from me if it's not a game I want to play after a day. It's a micro market and so casual games are going to be profitable because people are generally happy to throw a few dollars at a game that can distract them for half an hour. I think that's the equivalent of eating junk food because it's convenient. I'd be happy to include a paragraph regarding the implementation, but with Knizia games it ends up just becoming a ticking the box exercise. I've run out of meaningful ways to say 'nice presentation, the game lacks substance'. If presentation is all you need, then you don't need a review because you can get that from looking at the pictures.
I do agree with you here. Entirely. This is a game that can't be looked at from a "Board Game" perspective. It isn't. It's a physical puzzle/educational game that Is a play on Sudoku. Sure, it's heavily polished and branded with another game. It's like releasing Dr Pepper's Sudoku, maybe. But take that out of play and the game is still reasonably solid. James, for the Winds of War review, you asked for another code to take a second look at the game, but for a game with a name like Knizia that gets an equally terrible score, I wish you would have considered it here. And Angelus, the fact that you've clearly admitted your bias towards Knizia's more casual games should ave started with ensuring this review, or non review as it were, was never posted. I don't even see a reasonable explanation of how the game was implemented. Hate the game as you may, the point is that you are a reviewer. Look at any of the major review sites and even if the game is a complete failure, they still put significant effort into discussing the full expanse of the game. The fact that you've been continually unwilling to for some games is a knock against your skill and credibility as a reviewer. If this site wants to be taken seriously, James, things HAVE to change. i initially thought I might have been in the minority when I emailed you, but now it seems as though many others are in the same camp. Heck, even with a game I felt got a decent review "Scotland Yard", the lack of depth in the review was astonishing. If you remove the pictures, the review was a pittance. Angelus, it's clear you are a smart individual, but I wonder if your career in being an unbiased reviewer is something you should reconsider, as I don't think I've ever seen a reviewer MORE biased. And if you take many of the games you've given terrible scores to and compare them to a) other review sites (including BGG) and b) consumer reviews - the disparity is something of note, and it's driving people away from this site. I'm not saying you have to bend to the whim of every person on the planet, but when it's completely the opposite time after time after time after time... There's something wrong there. And James, the expectation of the people who visit this site to balance out the reviews is nice in theory, but only showcases the cracks to the foundation that much more. It's a shame. It really is. And the fact that no one is addressing it is that much more troubling.
I have to admit, I am getting sick of Angelus Morningstar's reviews. For about the last three months when I see a review written by him I merely ignore the review, look at the pictures, and find something more substantive on another website. The concept of this website is great, but it has lost a lot of value. Sure, he'll claim that companies ask Ipadboardgames to review the game, but I doubt that seriously. Really? If he comes clean and announces to everyone that he tried to market a game and Knizia turned him down for substandard quality then at least it would make sense. I see he posted another mostly useless review for "Winds of War". I say mostly because at least he raises some valid points there. But mostly I agree with "BGPlayer" that it is time to find a website that offers more substantive information and not Angleus' personal hate diatribe website.
I'm the owner of this site, Indarien, and the majority of games reviewed are the request of the developers. I'm not sure how you think the reviews industry works, but you don't write a review and then send it to companies saying "hey, pay me for writing this"! Winds of War was a terrible game, and I even wrote back to the publisher asking for more review codes so that I could try it too to confirm what Angelus thought. I did, completely. Regardless, I'm sorry you choose to find another site. I appreciate Angelus' honesty when it comes to reviews. Of course, there is a reason we provide a rating and comment system, and that's so that you can add your own rating to the mix, and your own review to either complement, or disagree with what the reviewer has said. Simply using it to bash the reviewer isn't productive. If you've played it - let us know what you think of the game. Review it. There is no weighting given to the reviewers score, and I chose to do that on purpose. They are just one voice of many, and we would definitely appreciate your input there. The more people vote, the more accurate a picture of how good the game is.
I can cut and paste the emails where they ask and provide review codes if you doubt the claim.
For me, I disagree with the last comment. I like this site and share most of the reviewers opinions. I bought this game a couple of month ago, and felt mislead, because it turned out to be just another "polished" puzzle game, far behind my expectations when I read knizia. I love puzzle games too, but I hate it, when I get the feeling, publishers are just trying to make quick money. "towers infinite" for ex. Is more or less the same game.
Thanks for commenting BlackFire, we appreciate your input.
I just wanted to make a few quick comments about this "review" (I can't really call it one since the game itself was barely covered). First, this /is/ based on a physical game (http://www.huchandfriends.de/page/de/Die-Spiele/Lern-und-Logikspiele/city_skyline.php). Sure, it's an educational game, but it's a physical board game nonetheless. Second, as was mentioned above, it's clear that the reviewer has no interest in puzzle games. I, however, love them. I play a sudoku first thing every morning, and this game scratches that particular itch (sudoku-ish reasoning) incredibly well. Sure, it's not for everyone, but if you do enjoy that type of game, then this is a must buy (I'd give it a 7 or 8). It's just such a shame that the game couldn't be reviewed on the merits of the game itself. That said, I think it's time I unbookmark this site. I like the concept, but the execution falls incredibly flat. I can get better, more objective reviews from the BGG forums. Best of luck in the future!
Pugilist, one thing to remember is that often get asked to review these games. In which case, unless they absolutely fall outside of the purview of "could be a real board game" we probably have a duty to at least consider it. Consider that there are numerous physical board games that are effectively a puzzle game. I think it's better to have an inclusive approach than an exclusive one. That being said, I am happy to recognise my bias against Knizia games, and for all the reasons provided I have decided I cannot review them without that bias and so won't.
This review feels heavily biased by the reviewer's position on puzzle games, rather than providing an actual idea of what the game plays like or its quality. I feel that this is unfortunate and I hope similar bias doesn't keep slipping in. Combined with the lack of detail on the product it makes it very hard to form a judgement on the game, which in turn makes the review nearly useless. It would have been better to classify it as out of the purview of ipadboardgames.org and simply not review it. This may seem harsh but I have previously been a big fan of the site, which is why I am commenting rather than simply moving on to a different one.
It's a puzzle game for sure (though I agree that visually it looks like a board game). That being said, I'm glad you reviewed it because I probably wouldn't have heard of it otherwise. I actually enjoyed it quite a bit, but I play a lot of sudoku so this was right up my alley.
I do not agree with the assessment. The approach is very strange to play as a desktop. This is a pure puzzle game. I went through it all, and the levels there is really complex and interesting. It is theoretically should not be on your blog :) This is, in principle, not a board game!
Feel free to add your own rating; there is no weighted vote for the reviewer. It looks like it would be a board game, to me, with block pieces on a board. We include games that could theoretically be made into a board game, even if a physical one has not yet been made.