Watergate: A card-driven 2-Player game

Future games in need of testing and feedback
Forum rules
Please DO NOT POST BUGS on this forum. Please report (and vote) bugs on: https://boardgamearena.com/#!bugs
User avatar
Shobu
Posts: 584
Joined: 04 January 2020, 04:14

Re: Watergate: A card-driven 2-Player game

Post by Shobu »

Got notified someone posted in the group, but it seems the group is no longer here?
User avatar
McSchwifty
Posts: 1
Joined: 19 June 2023, 03:32

Re: Watergate: A card-driven 2-Player game

Post by McSchwifty »

Kayvon wrote: 14 June 2023, 15:24 No players are being added to alpha
Work on this adaptation has been abandoned.

If you're looking to test, do not post.
If you'd like to pick up on its development, it's available.
What do i need to do to pick it up and get it back on track
User avatar
Molsenolsen
Posts: 1
Joined: 14 January 2015, 05:09

Re: Watergate: A card-driven 2-Player game

Post by Molsenolsen »

I can’t join group, link doesn’t work?
User avatar
pmp
Posts: 7
Joined: 03 May 2015, 22:43

Re: Watergate: A card-driven 2-Player game

Post by pmp »

Since a week ago this game doesn’t work. I had two open games but I can’t play anymore
User avatar
FrankReynolds
Posts: 3
Joined: 01 June 2023, 08:57

Re: Watergate: A card-driven 2-Player game

Post by FrankReynolds »

Somebody please revive this game!
User avatar
Kayvon
Posts: 1059
Joined: 17 October 2011, 01:39

Re: Watergate: A card-driven 2-Player game

Post by Kayvon »

FrankReynolds wrote: 04 June 2024, 11:34 Somebody please revive this game!
Go ahead. It's available.

Edit: Unless you mean someone else should do it for you, which is a rather audacious ask.
User avatar
AlternativeMilks
Posts: 3
Joined: 05 October 2020, 01:37

Re: Watergate: A card-driven 2-Player game

Post by AlternativeMilks »

Kayvon wrote: 27 July 2024, 19:13
FrankReynolds wrote: 04 June 2024, 11:34 Somebody please revive this game!
Go ahead. It's available.

Edit: Unless you mean someone else should do it for you, which is a rather audacious ask.
What's the point of being rude to someone who is enthusiastic about a game with an abandoned implementation? Do you feel better about yourself now?
User avatar
Kayvon
Posts: 1059
Joined: 17 October 2011, 01:39

Re: Watergate: A card-driven 2-Player game

Post by Kayvon »

AlternativeMilks wrote: 30 July 2024, 18:41
Kayvon wrote: 27 July 2024, 19:13
FrankReynolds wrote: 04 June 2024, 11:34 Somebody please revive this game!
Go ahead. It's available.

Edit: Unless you mean someone else should do it for you, which is a rather audacious ask.
What's the point of being rude to someone who is enthusiastic about a game with an abandoned implementation? Do you feel better about yourself now?
Not being rude. It's clear from the entire thread that the game is available. It's equally clear that lots of people are excited to play it. So I give the asker the benefit of the doubt, hoping he's interested in taking on the project. If not, it's a huge ask to demand that someone else work for free for dozens of hours.

You wouldn't start demanding that someone mow your lawn, file you taxes, or cook you dinner for free. That's nuts. So I make the charitable assumption that the requester isn't doing that here (with the afterthought edit in case he is).
User avatar
jegharenplan
Posts: 11
Joined: 23 January 2017, 08:47

Re: Watergate: A card-driven 2-Player game

Post by jegharenplan »

You are conflating a request/expression of interest with a demand. Nothing in their post implied that they feel entitled to someone else working on the game and the use of 'please' pretty much indicates the opposite. It was nothing like demanding that a specific person do labor on your personal behalf.

It might be an extremely unrealistic request, but that doesn't make it rude because there was no entitlement implied.
User avatar
Kayvon
Posts: 1059
Joined: 17 October 2011, 01:39

Re: Watergate: A card-driven 2-Player game

Post by Kayvon »

That's fair. I don't think the requester was trying to be rude. As you said, it's just an audacious ask.

Likewise, my response was not intended to be rude, either. I merely pointed out, after noticing that maybe "please" implied he wanted someone else to do it, that it was a rather audacious ask.

I think there's enough room to grant both the request and the response a charitable interpretation. No one was intending to be rude here.
Locked

Return to “"Alpha" games”