So it‘s been a while. I am still struggling with what I want for my collection and for myself. But some things have become clearer. My current goal is to keep the collection at a fixed size of 200. With a few caveats this is currently in reach.
In general, I have partitioned my collection:
The Collection: 202/200. This includes pre-orders and games I plan to buy as soon as they are available. Games from the same „franchise“ are only counted once (Zombicide, Unmatched, Pandemic)
The Nostalgia Shelf—12 games I do not expect to play again for reasons but either my partner wants to keep them, I have huge Nostalgia about them or they were hard to get a hold of and… I just can‘t. This shelf needs to be monitored carefully, it doesn‘t have an upper limit but I strive to keep it small (<20) and I even sold games I thought were firmly placed here (City of Chaos).
The Trade Shelf—games I am trying to sell/trade ca. 20 games atm. (I am considering a „small games bin“ where I toss all the small stuff that is hard to sell (except for Oink and Button Shy games, those sell well) and will eventually get thrown into another „this needs to go“ Bundle)
So in a way my collection and how much I play the games in it should limit how many new games I buy or back. I could have gone with a budget. But I feel a limitation on the collection size is better. Because if I spend more than my budget, I cannot really fix it. If the collection becomes too large again, I can just find out which games to sell next. And it forces me to think about which games I want to keep and why. So with every game I sell, I also learn something.
There are still games in the collection I marked with „hmf“—these are candidates for leaving at some point. It‘s a gradual thing. At some point I hope to have only games I am excited to play on my shelves. But that day is still a bit in the future as I have been learning for years and years now to anticipate before buying which games will be a hit and which will be a miss… but even after more than a decade of honing in on only buying „favorites“ I still get too many misses.
I have also found out more about what I should not buy:
two player only games: They do not get to the table.
solo-only games: all of them have fallen flat for me. Solo-Modes are fine. Solo-only: not. Weird, I know. I‘ll probably try again.
classics/older games: If I am totally honest—I like new games better most of the time. The classics are classics for a reason and I own a few of them. And if someone asks for one I‘ll play. But for the most part they sit on my shelves without being played. Reasons: we played them way back (sometimes too much) and often we enjoy more recent iterations and production quality got a lot better and we like that.
games our friends buy (at least wait and see to find out how good Ark Nova is)
(this one is hard to figure out before buying) games where my first rules learning attempt fails or games for which I have to relearn the rules for every game. If the rules don‘t stick… I am not playing these games (all the more reason to try and learn digital to use it as an indicator or at least Watch It Played or something)
small box games in general are in danger of not getting played. Often they are fillers and there is not a lot of room for fillers in our game-nights and ergo in my collection. Exceptions apply for Scapegoat and Die Knuffies etc.
anything bought for reasons other than „Oh I really want to play this.“ What do I mean?
Pocket Mars: „I need all the Mars games“
Squaring Circle City: „I want to support this publisher“
Tapestry: „I am at FLGS to buy myself a bday present and they don‘t have what I want, so I‘ll buy a game I saw mixed reviews about.“
Weird small Kickstarters „Maybe it‘ll be another surprise favorite like Sprawlopolis.“
Yes, and I need to be really careful with the reviewers and the FOMO. Nothing new here.
So, I am getting to my desired collection size if not state (only exciting games) even with all the stuff I have bought and backed recently.
New acquisitions in 2022:
5 games bought (Cryo, Bad Company, Mind MGMT (that was FOMO) & Splendor Marvel, preordered: Azul Queen‘s Garden)
In my ideal world: “I will only buy games that I have lost at least once”. Because if I play it once and win, I tend to feel positively about it.
I made a list of games I could bear to live without, and Airecon is coming up, so I may put some bargains in the Bring and Buy. (That gives me a hard deadline for picking them out.) I was putting some in a crate this afternoon and realised that not only had I filled that crate I’d got less than half way through my list…
Yeah, I’m going to be trying to sell a whole bunch of stuff at Airecon, or on the facebook group beforehand. Good games as well, just ones I can’t see myself playing again, or take up space (or I’ve ordered the deluxe copy of, curse you Mind MGMT).
Airecon is Harrogate convention center right? Take a peg for your nose, I was there yesterday for a Lego engineering competition and several of the halls absolutely stink like rotten carrots. Hopefully that doesn’t put people off buying your games though😁
Do you really think that will get to the root of the problem? Or is it just the top issue? Maybe they’re hoping that people will just glaze over the smell quickly.
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?
Yes, kind of. There is one important thing though: games that need a minimum of 3 to work… when I bring games to a larger table I prefer very much knowing the game better than having only read the rulebook so 3+ only game are HARD. I hope bigger game nights are going to be more of a thing again but even so, I do not get all that many of those. So…
For me “Amount” of minis probably. I still have my huge pile of Zombicide stuff for the purpose of a plastic festival. I am fine with smaller numbers or just player minis. In general: piles of plastic better have a good reason being there. Definitely a put-off but often only after playing the game and realizing the plastic was superfluous.
This used to be on my list, but has got better in recent years. But seeing how Vampire Vendetta is inexorably marching towards ebay Kleinanzeigen maybe it still holds true. Should probably be added to my “orange” category.
What SVWAG called “component creep” right? I agree. I’d probably file this under “photos on BGG suggest the game is fiddly” and should definitely be on my list. Fiddly doesn’t get played.
I agree, some licenced games are great, but it still counts for a few penalty points. Even if everyone involved is acting in good faith, the cost of the licence and the practical demands of having to run stuff past the IP owner will cut into the amount of resources and flexibility available for the actual design and testing of the game.
(Back in the day I’d chat with Dave MacKenzie of Leading Edge Games when we met at conventions – their excellent Aliens boardgame was delayed about nine months, and a whole print run had to be pulped, because (according to what the studio told them, which may not be the whole story) Sigourney Weaver had decided at the last moment that she was a serious actress now and didn’t want her image used in the game. The company stumbled on for a few years but their finances never really recovered.)
(Sakura Arms is SVWAG’s fault. I could certainly see getting into it, but it’s a game that really needs a deep dive and my two-player time is very limited. Still, at least the boxes aren’t huge.)
Yeah, I’ve found getting sucked in by Kickstarters is a lot rarer now there’s a trend for around £100 including shipping for a euro with bells, whistles and all the component bloat.
I currently have $300 worth of games on hold at the store I work at. A Star Trek Adventures book, a few Battletech minis, and an expansion to Chronicles of Crime (Welcome to Redview)… and that’s $300.
I do not have $300. This makes the purchasing much, much easier… I barely have the $35 I spent on a few paints I “need.” Maybe after I am finished with yet another (probably useless) degree (graduating Spring 2023, I think! I hope!), I will have money for games again?
