Modern Art in Review

Read more...

Great review.

I find it weirdly interesting that European designers became famous in the game space for stripped down exercises of market mechanics. On the other hand, maybe it makes sense a lot of sense if you think of many of these games (esp. Knizia, Splotter, etc) as critiques of market failures.

I think using actual modern artists for the components is an interesting choice. I think the theme of the game might shine through better if the art was just sort of weird pseudo-art. As you point out, the perception-based value of things in market systems is kind of the point in this game.

Well, you know, the older editions DID have sort of intentionally bad approximations of modern art (such a misunderstood and misrepresented term...). I kind of think that some of the subtext is lost in this new edition because it’s not Liquid Metal, Christin P. and all of that.

It's funny that the thought of auction mechanics in a modern setting in general doesn't appeal to me but I'll bid for favor of the gods in cyclades like there is no tomorrow.

Michael Barnes wrote: Well, you know, the older editions DID have sort of intentionally bad approximations of modern art (such a misunderstood and misrepresented term...). I kind of think that some of the subtext is lost in this new edition because it’s not Liquid Metal, Christin P. and all of that.

Yeah, the older version had bad art to emphasize that you aren't suppose to be bidding on the quality of the painting. You're bidding as investment only.

Gary Sax wrote: Great review.
I think using actual modern artists for the components is an interesting choice. I think the theme of the game might shine through better if the art was just sort of weird pseudo-art. As you point out, the perception-based value of things in market systems is kind of the point in this game.

To some degree I agree with you, in that the theme might be more pure. However, I like the cognitive dissonance that using "real art" creates. Oftentimes we'll start out the game oohing and aahing over a particular piece of art, but by the end of the game we barely look at them. I think the weird numbing effect of the market is a pretty interesting feature.

Absolutely fantastic review.

I'm ashamed to say that in all my years of board gaming I've never actually played this. There were so many auction games around at the turn of the millennium that I didn't see the need for another. And no one I know owns a copy.

Makes me want to give it a whirl though. Very much like the idea of using real art. Among points already raised, it creates a nice contrast between art as art and art as investment.

I go back and forth about the new art. On one hand I think it does undermine the theme just a little to have actual decent art on the cards. But on the other hand I like the exposure it gives to those specific artists, and I think it's pretty darn good to boot. The new edition is graphically VERY good. It's easy to understand and looks very nice too.

The funny thing about Modern Art is that my big criticism about the game when I first played it ended up being its secret weapon. I originally thought that the game was way too fragile, allowing bad players to throw the whole thing off and give the game away. That is definitely true, but that's part of why the game works in the first place, thematically. And anyway, I've learned a greater appreciation of games that make the players figure out how to balance them.