The Backlash Effect

A mere hours after Tom Vasel posts a message questioning the popularity of the Gipf series as compared to other abstracts, Rick Thornquist does the same in his weekly roundup, throwing off an insinuation that these games derive most of their popularity simply because Rio Grande Games published them.

I hereby announce the start of a new Backlash Effect on Gipf, an effect most recently visited upon Caylus by people who haven't even yet played the game. Expect a series of people to now denounce Gipf games as over-produced and over-hyped, and "not so special" when compare to lots of other abstract games. I have my own gripes about games that I have not enjoyed as much as I was "supposed to". I've made these feelings clear on this blog as I've played them. I was a victim of believing the precursor to the "Backlash Effect": the "Hype Effect".

I suggest that everyone try the following exercise: go to your games rating page on the Geek and click on the arrow that arranges them all by rating, from 10s down to 1s.

Now, I assume that your 10s are only the real all-time classics that you expect even your grandchildren to enjoy. And the 1s are only reserved for games that simply are not games, like "Bingo", as opposed to simply bad games, like "Candyland".

For the remainder of the games, those in the 2 through 9 range, check if all of your 9s are really more enticing to you than all of your 8s. Do the 9s all hold a similar level of appeal to you? Do the 8s? Now do the same for the 8s and 7s, and so on down the line.

Look at your list. Remember that most games have both good and bad aspects. The best games have a few faults, and (most of) the worst have a few saving graces. Maybe both sides of the coin are true, to a certain extent.

Yehuda

P.S. Edited to remove poorly worded sentences.

Top games and ratings

I never posted anything about the top 100 games from "The One Hundred" blog, because, frankly, it didn't excite me. Not in concept - we have lots of other 100 lists out there, who really needs another? BGG and the Internet top 100 aren't enough for you? And not in execution - the very fact that so many of the games were Eurogames from the last five years is enough to indicate that the list is not really serious.

And definitions: what do people mean by "best" games anyway? Most played? Best designed (according to the scorer)? Most popular? Most enduring? Most widely acceptable? Most "fun"?

Problems in compiling these lists are well known. The unsuitability of comparing games aimed at different types of players (Chutes and Ladders vs Monopoly vs Chess vs Puerto Rico). The preponderance of expansions rated highly because they are only rated by people who enjoyed the original game to bother with the expansion. The preponderance of the latest games simply because older games have become routine. The preponderance of games rated according to the tastes of visitors to the site, rather than to any sort of objective ratings. And so on. The same type of silliness applies to movie ratings on IMDB vs the AFI's top 100 movies.

Excluding expansions, we find that the top 50 of the "Top 100" matches closely with the Internet Top 100, but not very closely with the BGG top 50. Between the three of them, there are more than 50 games that are on only one list out of the three, games such as Go, ASL, Cosmic Encounter, Poker, and Titan. Oh, these games make it further down the list in some cases.

Humans have a strange desire to rank unsimilar elements by rank. Really, any suitable ranking system has to be multi-tiered. For instance, a game should be rated according to some list of parameters such as the following:

Rank each 1-10:

For number of players:
2-player
3-player
4-player
5-player
6-player
7+ players

For age of players:
Up to 6
6-10
11-13
14-18
19+

Rule Complexity Scale:
Very simple (Chutes and Ladders)
Simple (Chess)
Moderate (Modern Art)
Complex (Puerto Rico)
Very Complex (ASL)

Play Complexity Scale:
Very simple (Chutes and Ladders)
Simple (Ra)
Moderate (Settlers of Catan)
Complex (Age of Steam)
Very Complex (Civilization)

Tactical Complexity Scale:
Very Simple (Chutes and Ladders)
Simple (Hearts)
Moderate (Settlers of Catan)
Complex (Modern Art)
Very Complex (Go)

Time length of full "set of games":
5 minutes or less (one hand of bridge)
10-20 minutes
30-45 minutes (one rubber of bridge)
1-1.5 hours (one game of bridge)
2-3 hours
3-6 hours (a full set of duplicate bridge)
7 hours or more

Game seriousness:
None - lighthearted with no decisions
Mild - lighthearted but possible to win with luck and some skill or attention
Moderate - Family game, such as Monopoly
Heavy - Strategic game such as Puerto Rico
Very Heavy - War game

Components:
Pen and paper or none
Simple
Standard
Advanced
Crafted

Game luck elements:
None
Minimal
Moderate
Heavy
Total

Competitiveness [maybe]:
Cooperative
Some cooperation, possible single victory
Competitive, little interaction
Moderate interaction
Highly interactive, but no direct ability to damage
Direct damage to opponent, but no elimination
Possible early elimination through direct damage

Theme:
Abstract
Thin thematic
Moderate
Story Arc
Simulation

This could go on and on, I suppose. But with each parameter, so long as they all get rated for every game - and it really doesn't take that much longer to mark 30 parameters for a game than it takes to mark 1 - we get so much more value.

When we want to know the top rated games according to games that actually might compare, we can search accordingly.

Finally, the rating has to be used by people from all sorts of places and backgrounds - masses of people, grognards, euros, children, different countries and cultures. Weights of ratings should be calculated based on other games people have rated, as well as the age of the rating, with ratings having to be renewed regularly in order to carry more weight. So if a person likes a whole slew of games that are of no interest to me, my ratings search will put little weight onto their rating.

Then all we have to deal with is shilling.

Yehuda

Update

I present to you the top 40 games from Rateitall.com:

1. Hi Ho Cherry-O (5.00)
2. Monopoly (4.25)
3. Chess (4.16)
4. Scrabble (4.15)
5. Scattergories (4.13)
6. Risk (4.10)
7. Taboo (4.08)
8. Stratego (4.03)
9. Balderdash (4.00)
10. Rail Baron (4.00)
11. Risk 2210 A.D. (4.00)
12. Chebache (4.00)
13. Cranium (4.00)
14. Clue (3.94)
15. Axis & Allies (3.93)
16. Trivial Pursuit (3.92)
17. Yahtzee (3.88)
18. Acquire (3.86)
19. Battleship (3.85)
20. Settlers of Catan (3.83)
21. Life (3.79)
22. Othello (3.77)
23. Checkers (3.74)
24. Candy Land (3.70)
25. Parchesi (3.69)
26. Pictionary (3.68)
27. Diplomacy (3.56)
28. Chinese Checkers (3.55)
29. Chutes and Ladders (3.49)
30. Sorry (3.45)
31. Go (3.33)
32. Lord of the Rings (3.31)
33. Backgammon (3.23)
34. Samurai Swords (3.20)
35. Operation (3.09)
36. Popomatic Trouble (3.00)
37. Da Vinci Game (3.00)
38. Triomioes (3.00)
39. Mouse Trap (2.53)
40. Hear Me Out! (2.00)