Sure. It’s better with 4 or more players.
At first every player is assigned a number. Then one person starts.
They say “I went to the market with (another player’s number)”. That player has to quickly respond “Why with (their number)?”. The first player says “Then with what?”, they say “With (any other player’s number)”.
For example: 1 says “I went to the market with 2”. 2 has to say “Why with 2?”. 1 has to say “Then with what?”, 2 says “With 4”. 4 has to respond “Why with 4?” and so on so it’s a call and response game.
Repeat until someone gets confused, makes any mistakes or takes too long to respond. When they do, the person that flustered them gets to assign them a new name. This replaces their number, they have to answer to it and everyone has to use it now. Generally these are insults as this is a rowdy game between friends but of course they can choose whatever they want.
If someone makes more mistakes after being assigned a nickname you add adjectives to it. Eventually you’ll get things like:
“I went to the market with fat smelly pig”
“Why with fat smelly pig?”
“Then with what?”
“With arrogant ass”
And so on.
After 3 adjectives you’re eliminated and everyone continues until 1 person is left.
It’s confusing because you gotta keep track of everyone’s names and your own and answer quickly.
That’s pretty cool for big groups.
We had a verbal game that was similarly confusing called “I went to the market”
We had 2 games we used to play that I haven’t been able to find online. One I think is common but I just can’t find it, the other is nonsensical and probably super local.
Is it a vet?
It seems you’re allowing one person to talk on behalf of a whole group a lot.
Orange is light brown
You reminded me of the loading screen in “The Stanley Parable”. There’s text that reads:
“The end is never the end is never the end is never…”
And it wraps around the screen. Fitting for that game.
I don’t know if that’s true. I thought it wasn’t. In theory they should work together if they both implement the protoco, maybe it’s the clients or the instances that are lagging behind?
I know this doesn’t answer your question but a lot of client apps are open source so you can always request a feature on their GitHub.
I don’t think the statements you cite are destructive or toxic. They’re just negative reviews. If you truly don’t care what people say then they shouldn’t matter to you.
As for the charge that a game is generic and you enjoyed it, well think about it. A game reviewer has to play hundreds of games a year. They’re constantly playing games. If a game is like other games they’ve played it’ll be boring for them. You on the other hand as a player probably don’t play nearly as many games. So it’s less likely that a game is like other games you’ve played. Even if it’s similar to other games you probably haven’t played them so to you it’s new.
There’s nothing wrong with people having different opinions about games and expressing them in their own language no matter how mean it may sound to you as a fan. If you had fun with it, great.
I kept zooming in trying to decipher it
Reminds me of a game we learned from some south Asian students at my school called odd even.
It’s a 2 player game. First the players choose odd or even. They bump fists with one hsnd, and show a number at the same time. 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5. Their numbers are added up and the result is checked if it’s odd or even. Whoever called it right wins. But wait that’s not the actual game it’s just the deciding round. Like the coin toss before the soccer game
Whoever won the deciding round picks “bowling” or 'breaking". Whichever one they pick the other player is the other.
Both players bump fists and show a number(1-6 with only thumb being raised meaning 6) at the same time. The bowling player’s goal is to show the same number as the breaking player. If the numbers are different the value of the breaking player’s hand is added to their score(starts at 0) and players bump fist again and again until the bowling player calls it right. When they do the breaking player’s score is saved and players swap positions. They play one more game the same way with the new breaking player’s goal being to exceed the score of the original breaking player. If they do they win. If they’re stopped before that they lose.