Disclaimer: a copy of Match Me If You Can was provided free of charge for the purposes of this review. All views are my own.
Intro
Match Me If You Can is a relatively new party game published by Ravensburger, in which a group of 3-8 players must answer one of 300 zany questions. These are usually posed as surveys like: ‘We asked 100 pizzas: Which topping would you most like to burn in the oven?”. As you might guess from that example, the twist here is that there isn’t really a correct answer. Instead, a correct answer is a shared answer; you must produce the same response as at least one other player to score. For anyone who has played Quiplash, various versions of which can be found in the Jackbox Party Pack game collections, this has a similar energy.
1 – The very Jackbox-coded score markers
What’s in the box?
The game comes with 150 double-sided question cards, a tearable (use scissors!) notepad for answers, a scoreboard, 8 score trackers, and 8 double-sided betting tokens. The overall design of the scoreboard and score trackers are quite clever as you’re able to slot the score trackers into one another and then slot them into the scoreboard to represent each player’s score. While they’re included by necessity, the notepads feel a bit wasteful as they’re limited in supply. Any sheet of paper will do to scribble answers on.
How does the game work?
At the start of each round, one player picks up a Level 1 card and reads the question out loud. Then, players scribble their answers on their answer sheets. Everyone then reveals their answers at once, and players with matching answers go on to the next round and score points equal to the ‘level’ of the question. Those who fail cannot answer questions until the round resets. They can, in subsequent rounds, vote on whether they think there will be a match before answers are revealed. Each round continues for a maximum of 3 turns, or earlier if there are no matches, with each turn featuring its own unique set of questions. After turn 3, you reset back to level 1 cards. This continues until at least one player reaches a somewhat arbitrary 13 points.
2 – The ‘zany’ questions supposedly asked by inanimate objects.
First impressions
As with many party games, the more players the better. With this in mind, I cajoled six friends into testing Match Me If You Can. Once they’d calmed down enough to pay attention to the rules, the simplicity of the rules meant there was very little explanation to do and little back-and-forth with the rulebook.
The first game was quick to start but also quite quick to finish as the score limit of 13 was easy to reach. This meant that you could reset the game very quickly and get through a lot of questions at pace. Personally, while I would have preferred slightly longer games, the scoring system meant that it was very difficult to catch up if you fell behind early as the game would end within a few rounds.
While it’s technically a competitive game, it was quite difficult to care about the score. The real fun is in simply answering the questions and the subsequent bickering about the result. Some of this (extremely light) tension comes from the idea that your answer might not be based on what you or the other players might think is right; it’s what you think other people will write. One of the less abstract questions, for instance, asked how long it takes for a smartphone to charge from 0 to 100%. I answered one and a half hours, based on my own phone, but got zero matches. While answers varied a bit, “two hours” was the overwhelming consensus. Cruelly, one friend (let’s just call her ‘Wilhemina’) who wrote “two hours” admitted that their phone also takes one and half hours. I felt betrayed.
I may not have been the best at gauging consensus then, but it was usually easy to match on a Level 1 question. We expected consensus to be harder to reach as the level of card goes up, but this wasn’t really the case. Players who were knocked out on a previous question could also vote, meaning everyone was still engaged at all times. This is a smart design choice, as making it a knockout tournament would have diluted the friendly, communal tone of the game.
3 – Two of the eight voting tokens, easily replaced if playing with more than 8 players
Unlike Quiplash then, the game is light rather than irreverent in tone and so appropriate for all ages. I’m convinced them that a similarly positive experience can be had playing this with strangers and aquaintances, barring a barrage of in-jokes substituting for more “proper” answers.
Breaking the game
A section on how to ‘break’ a simple, family-friendly card game might be a surprise to see, but I feel it’s worth mentioning this as a warning. Within a couple of questions, it became quickly apparent that there was a pretty easy way to ‘cheese’ the game. While the rules have a section on what might constitute a match, there are no obvious restrictions in what constitutes a valid answer. This means that the game can be completely broken, for instance, by two particularly cynical players just answering every question with ‘banana’ or ‘bum’. Or, in the case of the group I played this with, something much ruder. Before you play, I suggest setting some clear rules on what constitutes a valid answer. For instance, if a question asked you ‘how many’ or ‘what colour’, you should answer with a number or a colour and not, say, ‘elephant’ as every answer.
Limitations
The game is designed for groups up to eight players. In theory, there isn’t really anything to stop you from expanding the number of players to fit your group size other than some easily overcome component limitations. In reality, going beyond this limit might prove a little too chaotic. If you want to extend this to 10 players for instance, all you need is some more pens, paper, and a way to extend the vote to more players. Perhaps a heads/tails thumbs up/thumbs down approach would work.
Final Thoughts
Match Me If You Can is a simple party game that is best played in short sessions between other games. It’s not a game that you carve out an entire evening for, nor do I imagine this is what the designers envision. Other groups may get more mileage out of it and it’s likely a fun game for younger kids. I can’t help thinking that there is an inherent lack of balance in the scoring system, so I’d recommend not playing competitively. Despite the existence of a scoring system, it is obviously a game designed to be played casually. So, while it won’t anchor a game night on its own, it is a fun and reliable option to pick up as a palette cleanser.
