Re:Design Is Why 2048 Sucks, and Threes Is a Masterpiece
by andrewla on Monday July 14, 2014 @10:50AM
(#8031171)
The game can take a while, but the version by Ketchapp (on iPhone), which was the first knockoff to hit the app store, gives goals based on what you've solved so far. Right now my display says "Your next goal is to get to the 16384 tile", whereas the Gabriele Cirulli version has the downside of interrupting me every time I hit 2048, which, as you point out, is quite common once you're used to the game mechanic.
Nonetheless, hitting 8192 remains a challenge, and I feel like I've been tantalizingly close to 16384, but have never quite managed it. So as far as I'm concerned 2048 (or, I guess, 16384) remains quite challenging.
In Threes, 768 is the furthest I've gotten. I've found that when things get tight in Threes, you can easily be stymied not just by new tile placement (the only real wildcard in 2048), but also by the "+", "1", and "2"'s that can result in the position being unplayable, thus adding in my mind a greater degree of chance to the game.
Nonetheless, hitting 8192 remains a challenge, and I feel like I've been tantalizingly close to 16384, but have never quite managed it. So as far as I'm concerned 2048 (or, I guess, 16384) remains quite challenging.
In Threes, 768 is the furthest I've gotten. I've found that when things get tight in Threes, you can easily be stymied not just by new tile placement (the only real wildcard in 2048), but also by the "+", "1", and "2"'s that can result in the position being unplayable, thus adding in my mind a greater degree of chance to the game.