Add-to-cart therapy is still a thing for me sadly. Also I cannot escape my general curiosity about new games and my love for discovery of new game spaces. So my next attempt to curb the buying is “buying better”. The thing that emerged from the past few months as an important factor in what gets sold: games that won’t get to the table. Besides a few (nostalgic?) collector’s items and games I have to hold on to for my partner’s sake, games that won’t get played get sold.
So, I’ve been trying to analyze what gets to our table and what does most definitely not. I want to prevent myself from “hopeful” buys that end up going to the sell pile almost immediately. The following lists are a little long. Feel free to ignore or add your own bullet points. What are your green/red/orange flags?
Green Flags: What gets to the table then? Deciding factors: playability with available players which includes me and my partner most of the time.
- games with good solo modes
- games that play well at two players
- deck-bag-pool builders
- cooperative games
- games with cool dice
- games that play in under an hour
- games with multiple paths to victory
Red Flags: Warning signs that a game will not make it:
- games that were designed as solo experience
- games designed for two players almost always fail
- games for 3-5 players
- games that need an app (I am not opposed to apps, they are just a hassle to deal with)
- games with numbered cards or texts that you have to go look for in a box or book
- one vs all games
- smaller versions of bigger games
- ugly (aka poor production values) games have to be extra good in all other aspects (yes, I am shallow like that), bad card quality is the worst
- tentacles (aka Cthulu themed games)
- our friends already own a copy
Orange Flags: May be a problem (some of these may not be determinable before buying):
- games with high complexity (my partner will rarely agree to one of these)
- Radho complains about two player mode (that’s his specialty, just ignore the gushing and read between the lines)
- combotastic games (I love them < my partner hates them)
- mean games (there are exceptions for quick games with many players)
- “box full of air” syndrome–this irritates me so much for some reason
- BGG comments mention AP
- Game is often compared to a game I own and like–often ends up disappointing
- (Roll) & Writes, most of them I sell on quickly
- Classics–rather seek a newer implementation (that’s on me, cult of the high production values), also sometimes older games have tons of expansions and it is often impossible to determine wether people gush about them due to nostalgia, a very specific expansion setup or whatever else.
- Great story. I am only just realizing that campaign games are a difficult bunch. Games that want to tell a story better use gameplay to have that story emerge… show, don’t tell.
- My “Flavor of the day”: One day I want all the Mars games, or area control games or everything designed by women, and then all the classics… beware buying something to “fill out the collection” make a geek-list instead.
- Ian O’Toole covers–a pretty cover doesn’t make a game.
- bad rulebooks lead to bad rule retention lead to game not getting played
- setup and teardown times (may be alleviated by insert)
- digital implementation does the game better (sad but true)
- gimmick games–some gimmicks are good most are not
- certain language dependent games: wait for translation
- added: BGG Photos suggest “game is fiddly” probably evidenced by too many different components or component creep
- added: beware beloved IP made into boardgames.
Treating this as a checklist, a game better tick one or more of the first group and as little as possible of the second and third groups. Exceptions apply of course.
I am trying to find more commonalities especially between the games that miss the mark for us.
This is just more for myself than all of you. Long text. So does anyone else have a list like this?
