Sorry for the long post but I want to make sure I explored all immediate differences between the game and leave no stone left unturned. I didn't do any prolonged search, simply downloaded mouser's draft pdf and the review made by fathergeek.http://boardgamegeek...eview-of-chef-cuckooChef Cuckoo:
For 3 to 8 playerspdf:
1-20 (teamplay for more than 5 or 6 players, one and two-player games use non-standard rules).Chef Cuckoo:
What pleased me most about Chef Cuckoo! was the Ingredient cards and how they could be used in multiple ways to tempt the judge for plastic stars. For example, if I knew the judge was health conscious
, I would select vegetables and ingredients that had reasonable portions and low calories. If I knew the judge was meat lover, I would load my dish with tasty meats and sauces. If I knew the judge enjoyed presentation and looks, I would select Ingredient cards that had complimenting colors. There was always enough for me to use and to think about to provide a creative dish that corresponded to the judge’s Food Challenge. pdf:
When you take on the role of judge, you'll tell
the chefs what you expect from them and how you'll be judging their dishes.Chef Cuckoo: Judge needs to be seduced by anonymous flavorThird, the chefs know the judge.
Each chef must now carefully consider what would constitute the “best”or “worst” according to the judge. This can be highly speculative, but not to a point where the chefs are completely clueless.
The judge now flips one stack of Ingredient cards over at a time and talks through their thought process used to determine
if the 3 ingredients fit the Food Challenge card’s description.
Once they are all reviewed, the judge now takes the tin can full of plastic stars and places 2 plastic stars on the stack of Ingredient cards that best correspond to the food challenge and the judge’s personal taste. One plastic star is awarded to the runner-up.
The chefs now reveal who provided what ingredients and collect their plastic stars if they were awarded any. Chefs are welcome to defend their culinary choices, but the judge’s decision is final.pdf: Judge needs to be food critic
As judge, you decide
what the chefs will prepare and any special instructions or
challenges. Your assignment to the chefs could be something as straightforward as
“Prepare a delicious dish” to something more challenging like “Prepare a vegetarian
appetizer using watermelon”.
After they present their creations, you'll critique them and
as you see fit.Competition vs. Casual aka Ping Pong is not Table Tennis:
Cody considers the dishes and gives his critiques:
“I'm going to start with Ellen's dish. I love the surprise idea of presenting the chicken and
mushrooms as a roll, wrapped up in Lassange Noodles. I think the Mushrooms and Chicken
would go really well together. However, I think it would have been really amazing if you had
made a kind of cheese sauce for the mushrooms and chicken, instead of just having the grated
Parmesan cheese on top.. I'm afraid the actual mushroom and chicken might taste a little bland,
and I wouldn't say it was the truly unique flavor combination that I was hoping for.”
“Now for Lisa's dish: I'm not sure how the Lavender and Peach flavorings would work with
the Lobster, but I'm dying to taste it and find out! I said I was interested in unique flavors and a
great presentation, and you delivered! The idea of the simple elegant cucumber slices around
the plate sounds beautiful, and the contrast between the cold plain cucumbers and the Buttery
scented Lobster sounds amazing.”
“I'm giving the 5,10,50, and 100 point chips to Lisa – for a total of 165 points. I'm giving the
25 point chip to Ellen, for a good effort.”
Cody gives out the Judging Award Chips to the Chef
players, who add their points from this round to their score sheet.
Parent Geeks also had a wonderful time and the game served up a lot of laughter. With the Parent Geeks, we played with both game variants and the table talk and arguments were spicy and rich which actually resulted in a few judgement reversals. Non-gamers also had a wonderful time and were ready to play the game again once it was over, demanding seconds. Players who also enjoyed cooking shows, like Iron Chef and Chopped, loved the game’s theme and wouldn’t stop talking about their favorite cooking show moments even when we tried to change the subject. Of course, all Parent Geeks who enjoyed Apples to Apples loved Chef Cuckoo!, which should come as no surprise.
Gamer Geeks agreed the game was fun, but would only sit down for a game if they had to play it with non-gamers or their kids. They suggested that Chef Cuckoo! would require the right group (where “right” means funny and sarcastic) to make the game entertaining. In other words, it did little to please their palate or satisfy their hunger.
If the food theme weren't the same, Chef Cuckoo might as well be talking about which Playdoh shape and colors look best on which food.
Your game would fit much closer to a competitive game of architecture design or at least a competitive game on which person's lego everyone should all work on cause it's the best.
What you thought they mentioned is actually a real concept found in almost every card game in the world: The fact that the dealer must hand the players all their cards and be the arbitrator of cheating/rule breaking and once the round is over, the dealer decides who the winner is based on the predefined rules presented by the card game.Edit:
Another thing that might be worth noting is that card/board games aren't basing their similarity on mechanics/appearances because of the structure of the board to begin with.
It would be like saying all programming languages are the same because they are all slaves to the principle action of programming.
As far as I know, throughout history, board games are linked much closer to the symbol of the objects being used at play.
You can have two board games with two fruit objects playing at the exact same way for example but the board game whose fruit object is much suited for gambling will be used for gambling. The board game much suited for family fun will be used for family fun.
It's not a demographics issue. It's a convenience issue. If the math allows it to be much more diverse and change the reward factor towards random psychology then the game would be treated as the food gambling game versus the food family game. This doesn't include casino interventions where such things as card countings that are legitimate strategies were banned just to maintain the status of blackjack as a card game available in casinoes.
Your card game's design is simply much more suited for competitive play because it utilizes chips instead of banners deeming who won. A player chasing the lead leader in your rule set would be seeking not only to win "the current round" but to "grab the most chips in the current round" which would lead to an entirely different set of pattern mixing intent all together. (Meaning once it becomes competitive, the recipes would be done differently depending on a person's place instead of merely a chase towards the better recipe. Ex. the leader might decide to make a losing recipe that might be better at blocking the opposing player from winning as much chips hence reducing their likelihood to catch up.)
It really can't be said that the ideas are identical. Maybe the appearances are similar but once you step into the actual game (which is the most important criteria for judging a game's similarity) the environment would be so vastly different that any fan of your game wouldn't mistake your game for Chef Cuckoo.