House of Games from 2021 aims to give you some of the experience of the game show, at home, in miniature; the box is about the size of two standard packs of playing cards.
As on the show, play proceeds in several rounds; the 72-card question deck is divided into four 18-card individual games, and three cards from each will be played to make up a full game. These are stacked in the game box and drawn one by one.
For fans of the show these are all “buzzer games” rather than individual or pair games: the question is shown to everyone, and the first player to reach the answer puts a finger on the buzzer card. They then check the back of the question card; if they answered correctly, they get the card for their score pile. If not, there’s no penalty, but the next player can have a try at answering.
The four individual games, taken from the show, are:
Roonerspisms: there are two questions, and the answer to one is a spoonerism of the answer to the other (e.g. the clues might lead you to “Catflap” and “Flat Cap”).
Opposites Attract, in which you get a category and a clue in which each word or phrase is an opposite of one in the answer (e.g. “Rock Bands” and “Green Cold China Georges”).
This Round Is In Code, again with a category, but the exact answer is given in a simple substitution encoding (1=A, 2=B, etc.).
Answer Smash is always played as the last round, and the answers to a picture clue and a textual question have syllables that overlap (for example clues that lead to “Picasso” and “Sofa” will give the answer “Picassofa”).
At the end, the player with most cards wins. If there’s a tie, the winners play for another Answer Smash card; first correct answer wins the game. There is no stated limit to the number of players, though everyone needs to be able to see the question card at the same time, and with only twelve cards up for grabs ties seem likely to be more common in larger games.
Obviously this is not one for the serious hobby gamer. But how well can it work in a family setting? Most people should be able to answer most of the questions, and the various hints let them be sure before they jump in; given the lack of penalty for a wrong answer, the real competition is likely to be in the lunge for the buzzer card.
The cards are well produced and clear, though I might have been inclined to give each individual game’s cards a different background; they’ll get mixed up in players’ score piles during play, and they need to be sorted back into their own decks at the end. Artwork is very basic, just a House of Games logo and visual clues for the Answer Smash cards.
The rules are straightforward and, from my perspective as a rules writer and game teacher, very clearly written: perhaps the typical Zatu shopper doesn’t need to be told how to assemble a deck by selecting from multiple separate piles of cards, but someone who doesn’t know that won’t be prevented from playing the game. There’s no room for ambiguity in the question-answer setup, so the main scope for arguments seems likely to be who got their finger on the buzzer first; if this turns out to be a problem, one might do better to require a palm-down slap, so that everyone’s hands are in a defined order. With only twelve questions making up a full game, it shouldn’t outstay its welcome; but with three out of each set of 18 cards used in each game, you’ll soon start seeing questions you’ve seen before.
So I don’t think this will become a timeless classic for the family games cupboard, but it’s not expensive, and it could make for an enjoyable family gathering or two before you move it on.
If this does appeal, there’s also the larger Richard Osman’s House of Games (2020) from the same publisher, Ginger Fox Games of Cheltenham.
Scores
Overall Score 50%
Ratings
Artwork ★★
Complexity ★
Replayability ★★
Player Interaction ★★★
Component Quality ★★★
You might like
· Extremely clear rules
· Straightforward game play, should work with non-gamer families
· Combination of speed and wordplay needed
You might not like
· Very limited replayability
· Little to challenge or balance the more advanced gamer
· Potential for arguments over who touched the “buzzer” first.
