No, but I have a copy here I’d be willing to sell for cheap. :)
It feels super heavy, but also super abstract, and oddly punishing. None of the things I’m doing – planning and infrastructure for power plants, training scientists and sending them to conferences, cashing in favors from (?) lobbyists, managing an international market for carbon emissions – feels like the things I’m supposed to be doing, if that makes any sense. The map, inasmuch as you could call it a map, has no personality. Sometimes North America loves solar power, sometimes it prefers wind, sometimes it wants recycling plants. It’s just a random set of requirements that changes every game. Furthermore, there are all these arbitrary goals around the edges of the board that actually drive the gameplay, but they’re literally flipped up from a deck or drawn from a bag of chits. And they demand that you pay attention to them above all else, because they will scuttle your game if they don’t. So in one game, I absolutely must have two solar plants in South America, but in another game, I absolutely must get four scientists to the London climate talks, and in another game, I absolutely must max out my research into reforestation. If I don’t do these things, I will fail. I like how variable victory conditions can tweak a game, but I’m not sure how I feel about being straightjacketed by variable failstates.
I love the concept, however, of fighting against the downward pressure on the score track as a way to represent climate change. But, ugh, the combination of density and arbitrariness is just too much for me. Thumbs down on CO2, and I’m not at all kidding if anyone is interested in buying my copy.