The Must-Have German Games
Wiyum
much I like these games, and I would like to know what games are out there
that are classic or are simply neccessary in a collection of such games. I
would also like to know which of these games are available in English and
which are available with English rules and that need no German to play.
(Euphrat & Tigris fits this) I hear often about Hare and Tortoise, Modern
Art, Manhattan, El Grande, and more. I already have Mississippi Queen,
Settlers, Euphrat & Tigris, and the Settlers Card game.
Thanks in advance,
Will Beckley
Steffan O'Sullivan
>What are the "Must-Have" German games?
Hmmm ... "must-haves"? My list would include, alphabetically:
Basari
Caesar & Cleopatra (if you play two-player games)
Carabande with Action Set (if you play with non-gamers a lot)
El Grande (best in English, or make your own English cards)
Elfenland
En Garde (two player)
Igel Argern
Iron Horse
Titan the Arena (all right, it's a US variant of a German game)
Ursuppe with expansion
Wurmeln
I personally dislike Modern Art, and am indifferent about many others,
such as Manhattan. However, absence from this list does not mean
indifference or dislike - I am unfamiliar with many German games, a
condition I continually try to rectify.
--
-Steffan O'Sullivan | "You are either overly sentimental or extremely
s...@vnet.net | superstitious or both ... Upon reflection,
Chapel Hill, NC | perhaps here is the essential definition
www.io.com/~sos | of `honor.'" -Jack Vance
Wimmerf
For the most part, Steffan's list is quite good. He does have a bit of a bias
against Knizia games though, so you'll have to take his opinions with a grain
of salt ( sorry Steffan, ;-) ). Not only does he not like Modern Art (go
figure, it's one of the very best!), but he totally forgot to mention Medici
(another great).
Unfortunately, Steffan forgot to mention one of the all-time greatest, Hase und
Igel. I'm sure that was a simple oversight -- I'm confident that he'd agree
with the "must-haveness" of H&I. It's near the top of my list, simply
becauseof its simplicity and elegance and the fact that it's the game that is
singularly responsible for my preoccupation with German games (aka, descent
into madness).
Seriously, you can't go wrong with any of the games on this list. I'd like to
suggest, however, that you round out your collection first with El Grande. You
won't be sorry.
Happy Gaming,
Frank
Wiyum
have neccessary components that have much German on them?
Will
Wimmerf wrote in message <19981114182003...@ng77.aol.com>...
Steffan O'Sullivan
>For the most part, Steffan's list is quite good. He does have a bit of a bias
>against Knizia games though, so you'll have to take his opinions with a grain
>of salt ( sorry Steffan, ;-) ). Not only does he not like Modern Art (go
>figure, it's one of the very best!), but he totally forgot to mention Medici
>(another great).
Actually, there were twe Knizia games on my list ... Medici is all
right - I've come to accept it as okay. Still wouldn't make my own
"must-have" list, though ...
>Unfortunately, Steffan forgot to mention one of the all-time greatest, Hase und
>Igel.
Isn't that originally a British game? I've always thought so, which is
why I left it off. It is indeed a great game.
tedd...@earthlink.net
around.
Also, I would add:
E& T
KKK
Robert Rossney
Modern Art
Medici
Euphrat & Tigris
En Garde
Quo Vadis
Die Macher
Was Sticht?
Schocko & Co.
6-Tag Rennen
El Grande
I see that the first five games on this list are by Reiner Knizia. Well,
there you have my tastes defined, I guess. If I need to drag one game out
to show new friends what German games are all about, I usually pick Medici,
which is easy to learn, fast to play, and, once you grasp what's going on,
surprisingly deep. (Durch die Wuest may take its place soon, because it's
easy to learn, fast to play, surprisingly deep, and full of beautiful
multicolored plastic camels.)
I think Was Sticht? may actually be the deepest of the games on this list
(beating out E&T and even Die Macher). Quo Vadis is the nastiest. Schocko
& Co. is the most exciting. 6-Tag Rennen gets the most chaos out of the
least randomness. Die Macher is the longest and most complex. Modern Art
is the most unpredictable. En Garde is that rarest of things, a light
two-player game that can get as deep as you want it to. And El Grande is
the most diplomatic, or undiplomatic as the case may be.
Bob Rossney
r...@well.com
Trev
In the interest of clarification and in case you don't make the link
yourself. The Hase und Igel that Frank mentions, despite translating as Hare
and Hedgehog, is the same game as the Hare and Tortoise that you have heard
of.
Cheers.
Trev.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
mailto:Trev_Clar...@bigfoot.com
Remove '_notauto' from email address for personal replies
Check our web site at http://www.proweb.co.uk/~clanfork
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Randy Cox
>
> What are the "Must-Have" German games? I have just recently discovered how
I'd go with:
Barbarosa
Reibach & Co. (aka Get the Goods in the US)
Medici
Modern Art
Manhattan
die Macher
Extra Blatt
Kunst Stucke
Um Reifenbreite (or however you spell it)
Mark A Kadas
>What are the "Must-Have" German games? I have just recently discovered how
>much I like these games, and I would like to know what games are out there
>that are classic or are simply neccessary in a collection of such games. I
>would also like to know which of these games are available in English and
>which are available with English rules and that need no German to play.
>(Euphrat & Tigris fits this) I hear often about Hare and Tortoise, Modern
>Art, Manhattan, El Grande, and more. I already have Mississippi Queen,
>Settlers, Euphrat & Tigris, and the Settlers Card game.
>Thanks in advance,
>Will Beckley
Don't forget Durch die Wuste (Through the Desert), one of the
best pastel camel games ever.
Quo Vadis is a killer political game.
Both are Reiner Knizia designs.
-Kato
Stephen Tavener
Ave Caesar Wolfgang Riedesser Ravensburger
Durch Die Wuste Reiner Knizia Kosmos
Ursuppe Doris & Frank www.am.uni-erlangen.de/~nestel/
Die Siedler Klaus Teuber Kosmos
Modern Art Reiner Knizia Hans im Gluck
Medici Reiner Knizia Amigo
Tutankhamun Reiner Knizia Amigo
Euphrates & T. Reiner Knizia Hans Im Gluck
Tante Tarantel Doris & Frank --- " ---
Lowenherz Klaus Tuber Goldsieber
Shark Raives Warns Ravensburger
Die Mauwurf Co. Bertram Kaes Ravensburger
Spiel Der Turme Rudi Hoffman Schmidt Spiele
Billabong Dr. Eric Solomon Amigo
Expedition Wolfgang Kramer Queens (= Wildlife Adventure)
McMulti ? Hexagames
--
Stephen Tavener | "Good as it is to inherit a library,
Games bought,sold,traded,played | it is better to collect one"
http://www.scat.demon.co.uk/ | - Augustine Birrell
c_fa...@my-dejanews.com
"Robert Rossney" <r...@well.com> wrote:
> Since everyone's making a list, and I'm an inveterate list-maker:
>
So what's the deal with this game? :) I must say I've played it several times
and don't really see that it's all that great. It's very hard to get the
number trump until most of the cards are gone, and given that those are the 4
most important cards to the play, this seems to me to be a problem. I guess
there just doesn't seem to me to be as much control in the game as you might
expect. It also seems that much of the game involves getting the easiest
goals possible (assuming you don't play with the "no colors" goals, getting
plenty of "no tricks" seems to be the way to go). It would seem to me to be
more interesting if you got more points for the more difficult goals. Oh, and
perhaps a minor point, this seems to be a game that suffers from lousy
graphics. I certainly might have enjoyed it more if the cards weren't so hard
to look at.
Anyway, I'm not saying it's bad - I think it is a clever little game. I'll
play it again and I enjoyed it, but it's a far cry from Modern Art, IMHO.
Thanks,
Chris
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
cfar...@pacbell.net
Just to throw in my .02:
People have mentioined Medici, which I think is a fine game, but certainly
not a must-have. Get Modern Art first, if you like it a lot (and you probably
will), try Medici. It's not as good, IMHO, but it does take 6 and it's simple
and fun.
I'm shocked nobody has mentioned Elfenland given the rave reviews it gets :)
Not a big fan personally, and it doesn't make my list, but people like it
alot.
If you like cards, Mu & Mehr simply has to be on the list. Great game.
McMulti has also been mentioned, and it _is_ a great game, but it's also
impossible to get (if anyone has a copy on offer, please write me :).
My must-have list is fairly short: El Grande + expnasions (get 'em all),
Euphrat & Tigris, Modern Art, Die Siedler, Adel Verphlictet (maybe in a
couple years it will be replaced by Basari, but not yet IMHO), Durch die
Wuste. Much beyond these tends to be personal taste. If you like cards at
all, add Mu. If you like Cosmic Encounters/Civ/Dune type games, add Ursuppe.
If you like action games, you've got to hava Carabande. If you have any
inclination for business games at all, you likewise must get Schoko & Co. If
you like racing games, add Breaking Away or Elfenland. If you like two-player
abstract, GIPF is a must-have (and it's close to being a must-have in general
for me). Multi-player non- competitive, Take it Easy. Longer, heavier
strategy games, Die Macher. Fun fairly random free-for-all type games, Svea
Rike. You get my point :)
phombecq
Top Race 10
Sokrates 5
Halli Galli 7
Intrige 10
6 Nimmt! 5
Adel Verpflichtet 6
Airlines 7
Auf Heller und Pfennig 7
Bausack 8
Bohnanza 9
Caesar & Cleopatra 8
Comeback 5
Die Siedler von Catan 10
Die Siedler von Catan Seefahrer 10
Die Siedler Kartenspiel 10
Drunter & Druber 7
ElfenLand 6
En Garde 7
Entdecker 8
Euphrat & Tigris 9
Linie 1 7
Lowenherz 8
Manhattan 8
Members Only 7
Modern Art 9
Reibach & Co. 7
Show Manager 8
Speed 5
Take It Easy 7
Zum Kuckuck! 8
John Harrington
<kad...@cii3112-01.rcs.rpi.edu> writes
>"Wiyum" <WBec...@Mindspring.com> writes:
>
>
>Don't forget Durch die Wuste (Through the Desert), one of the
>best pastel camel games ever.
But surely not as good the all-time pastel camel game: "Limpid
Dromedaries In Aspic" by Theodore Q. Spurious?
--
John Harrington
AlanRMoon
MUE
BLUFF (Was LIARS DICE from MB and is now CALL MY BLUFF from F.X. Schmid/USA.)
WILDLIFE ADVENTURE (The English edition is tough to find.)
DRUNTER & DRUBER
MEDICI
MODERN ART
ADEL VERPFLICHTET
WAS STICHT!
Games that haven't been mentioned that you might want to take a look at:
ENCHANTED FOREST (It's supposed to be a children's game but I love it.)
VERNISSAGE
TUTANCHAMUN
CAREER POKER
EN GARDE is the perfect game to play on a plane. It fits easily on a tray.
Alan
Stanley, the Daredevil Crow!
Lots of fun; but only availabe in German right now.
Glenn Kuntz
> What are the "Must-Have" German games? I have just recently discovered how
> much I like these games, and I would like to know what games are out there
> that are classic or are simply neccessary in a collection of such games.
Both classic *and* necessary is
Krokonolhttp://toy-net.ch/felsberger/spielregeln/krokonol.htm
> I
> would also like to know which of these games are available in English and
> which are available with English rules and that need no German to play.
There is a higher quality English-language version available in the US (which
also saves on overseas shipping
costs).http://www.frontiernet.net/~crokinol/heirloom.htm
Scott
> (Durch die Wuest may take its place soon, because it's
>easy to learn, fast to play, surprisingly deep, and full of beautiful
>multicolored plastic camels.)
I was planning on buying the Knights/City expansion for Settlers,
until I saw all of the pretty, candy-like camels that come with Durch.
Mesmerized by the sheer amount of cute camels calling to me, I bought
Durch instead...
I am not disappointed in the game. But I sure wish they had chosen a
little bit more 'contrasty' color set when playing the game. But
seeing them all lay there in the box, the colors, the colors....
Mike Edwards
However, I'll mention Ritter Sich Wir Kann, or Every Man for Himself,
which is a personal favorite of mine. A fun "screw your neighbor" type
game...
--
Mike Edwards - Shoreline, Washington
Views expressed are my own.
Mr Clark
games we have played have been won by a 9 year old (I kid you not) gaming
prodigy. By the way, it is called Rette Sich Wer Kann (I think the word
Ritter in means knight in German.)
Gregory Nelson
Mr Clark <clark....@virgin.net> wrote:
>Argh, you beat me to it Mike. I like this game too, even if the only
>games we have played have been won by a 9 year old (I kid you not) gaming
>prodigy. By the way, it is called Rette Sich Wer Kann (I think the word
>Ritter in means knight in German.)
>
No, no, no. He's talking about the game
Knight Yourself - We Can!
A big favorite in the Royal household.
Wiyum
completely free of his own games. I really must respect that. Not only does
one of the greatest designers in the industry read and post here, but he
reccommends the works of others rather than givingg himself credit. Thank
you sir!
My only complaint is that I am curious to know which of your own games you
would consider "must-haves." A few have suggested Elfenlands and some
others, but what do you think?
Will
AlanRMoon wrote in message <19981115142321...@ng85.aol.com>...
AlanRMoon
>I must respect Mr. Moon for giving me a list of must haves that was
>completely free of his own games. I really must respect that. Not only does
>one of the greatest designers in the industry read and post here, but he
>reccommends the works of others rather than givingg himself credit. Thank
>you sir!
>
>My only complaint is that I am curious to know which of your own games you
>would consider "must-haves." A few have suggested Elfenlands and some
>others, but what do you think?
>
>Will
>
>>Thank-you for the kind words Will, but you overestimate me. There is simply
no way I am one of the greatest game designers in the industry. Klaus Teuber,
Reiner Knizia, Sid Sackson, Wolfgang Kramer, Karl Heinz Schmiel, Francis
Tresham, Richard Borg, these are the big guys, and it's one heck of a major
step up from where I am to where they are.
As to what games of mine are "must-haves", I have to leave that up to others.
What I will tell you is that I don't play most of my games very often after
they are published for quite a few reasons:
1. When I work on a game, it becomes work. So playing it after the job is
finished is sort of like taking a busman's holiday.
2. When I play my games, too often I spend the game worrying about whether the
other players are enjoying themselves.
3. I have a hard time seeing the good parts of the game because I see all the
little mistakes or things I wish I'd done differently.
4. I don't learn anything from playing my own games. But even when another game
is bad, there is often something to be learned from it, maybe one idea that can
be used or modified into something else in one of my own games.
5. I hate it when people have rules questions, especially legitimate rules
questions!
6. I want to experience what is out there, because besides being fun, playing
games is research.
What was fun though was standing in the Amigo stand at Essen on the Saturday
and watching 50+ games of ELFENLAND being played (no exaggeration, I counted).
People were even playing on the floor and over in the D&D part of the stand.
That was a thrill.
Of course, as with almost everything, there is an exception or two. The game of
mine I enjoy most is WER HAT MEHR? (Piatnik, 1991, long out-of-print).
Incidentally, this game is notable as having one of the worst box covers
ever!!! My friends call it, politically incorrectly, THE AIDS GAME. But one of
the reasons I enjoy it so much is because when I'm playing, I never think of it
as my game. It's just fun. I've played dozens of games with friends Aaron
Weissblum (who considers it one of his favorite games) and Mark Noseworthy. I
even enjoy it despite the fact Mark wins most of the games.
Alan R. Moon
Mike Edwards
(Gregory Nelson) wrote:
> In article <36506D6C...@virgin.net>,
> Mr Clark <clark....@virgin.net> wrote:
> >By the way, it is called Rette Sich Wer Kann (I think the word
> >Ritter in means knight in German.)
> No, no, no. He's talking about the game
>
> Knight Yourself - We Can!
>
> A big favorite in the Royal household.
Yikes, my spelling is bad, even in German. Yes, I meant Rette - I think
the Ritter comes from too much Die Siedler.
Benjamin Foy
> As to what games of mine are "must-haves", I have to leave that up to others.
Well if Alan won't say it, I will. Alan has one game that is definitely a
"must-have". That game is Elfenroads. I am not talking about Elfenlands
which is a much simplified version of the original. Elfenlands is a very
good "family" game, Elfenroads is a excellent "gamers" game.
Elvenroads has 2 elements required for movement, movement cards and
conveyance chits. The chits are bid on then placed on the board. The
cards are chosen. A player can hoard cards but needs the chits
to move. Players with alot of money tent to get better chits. Players
get money by moving or turning in gold cards, both of which cost the
player movement cards. So each turn a player has to weigh the benefits of
moving with staying. Fortunately there are usually plenty of reasons to
move.
Elfenlands removes the bidding aspect. Which brings up a question which I
have. Has anyone converted an Elfenland set to play Elfenroads? Since
the gold chits and gold cards are missing it is not straight forward.
There was a good description of what was needed to play Elfenroads in the
Elfenlands rules translation. But the Author (Alan?) stated he had never
played Elfenroads using the Elfenlands set.
- Ben
---------------------------------------------------------------------
"Cold hearted orb that rules the night,
Removes the colours from our sight.
Red is grey and yellow white,
But we decide which one is right.
And which is an illusion???."
from Nights in White Satin by The Moody Blues 1967
tedd...@earthlink.net
>
> I see most of the ones I like have already been covered.
>
> However, I'll mention Ritter Sich Wir Kann, or Every Man for Himself,
> which is a personal favorite of mine. A fun "screw your neighbor" type
> game...
>
> Mike Edwards - Shoreline, Washington
> Views expressed are my own.
problem here. This one is definitely not for everyone.
tedd...@earthlink.net
up some pieces though.
Richard Vickery
>> Was Sticht?
>
>So what's the deal with this game? :) I must say I've played it several times
>and don't really see that it's all that great. It's very hard to get the
>number trump until most of the cards are gone, and given that those are the 4
>most important cards to the play, this seems to me to be a problem. I guess
>there just doesn't seem to me to be as much control in the game as you might
>expect. It also seems that much of the game involves getting the easiest
>goals possible
I think the deduction angle is cute, but the main part is selecting a hand to
match one of your remaining tasks, and ensuring that your opponents can NOT do
the same. This is why the zero trick option is not necessarily easy - it all
depends on what cards you are forced to take. Making all tasks the same value
allows the dealer to slough one off if they win, which is a nice touch.
I class it as the best of the "Oh Hell" variants.
Richard Vickery Our quest is for Meaning, \ /
Physiology & Pharmacology but the meaning is The Quest. (oVo)
UNSW, Australia ) (
ph. 61 2 9385 1676 Life's a Hoot! ^ ^
http://www.med.unsw.edu.au/Physiology/school/staff/vickery/welcome.html
Joe Huber
"Wiyum" <WBec...@Mindspring.com> writes:
|>What are the "Must-Have" German games? I have just
|>recently discovered how much I like these games,
|>and I would like to know what games are out there
|>that are classic or are simply neccessary in a
|>and which are available with English rules and that
|>Art, Manhattan, El Grande, and more. I already have
|>Mississippi Queen, Settlers, Euphrat & Tigris, and
|>the Settlers Card game.
First of all - like Steffan, I'm not very fond of
Modern Art. _Most_ people I know enjoy it more than
I do, though.
The "German" games (refering to the style moreso than
country of origin) I've found to be the most enjoyable,
in no particular order (all are available in English or
playable with just a rules translation, IMHO):
Die Siedler
Elfenroads
El Grande
Schnaeppchen Jagd
Santa Fe
Air Baron
Wildlife Adventure
Marracash
Imperium (one of the New Games in Old Rome set)
Mu
Suppenkasper
Bohnanza
Freight Train
Extrablatt
Ursuppe
Euphrat & Tigris
Showmanager
Iron Horse
Carabande
Other games that I don't consider quite as good, but
which still appeal to me and might appeal more to
someone else:
Acquire
Cosmic Encounter
Auf Achse
Fast Food Franchise
Keywood
Phantoms of the Ice/Powerplay
Hare & Tortoise
Sinbad
Can't Stop
Tyranno Ex
Airlines
Der fliegende Hollaender
Drunter & Drueber
Entdecker
Um Reifenbrite
Settlers Card Game
Tutanchamun
Die Schlangen von Delhi
Big Boss
In Teufels Kueche
Was Sticht
Igel Aergern
Loewenherz
Bakschisch
Alaska
Zankapfel
6 Tage Rennen
Mississippi Queen
Hattrick
For Sale
Res Publica
Zum Kuckuck!
Zug Nach Westen/Rock Island
Manitou
Die Schlacht der Dinosaurier
Volle Huette
Frisch Fische
Flinke Pinke
Olympia 2000 (v. Chr.)
Rainbows
Maestro
Zoff in Buffalo
Elfenland
Ave Caesar
Das Hornberger Schiessen
Durch die Wueste
Wettstreit der Baumeister
Timbuktu
Business
Phew - that's longer than I expected.
In any case, hopefully it's a long enough list to
sort usefully - many of the games are not readily
available, and the themes, play, and structure of
these games vary wildly.
Joe
WBecker679
>mine I enjoy most is WER HAT MEHR?
I was just curious. Do you have a favorite that you developed rather than
designed?
I'd bet a (New) Guinea, if we asked King Solomon, he would say it involved
things Flat in the Mare Corallium.
Ed Becker
Cathy Weeks
: 3. I have a hard time seeing the good parts of the game because I see all the
: little mistakes or things I wish I'd done differently.
I think that's par for the course. I'm a "Senior Information Specialist"
which means that I'm a technical writer, graphic designer, advertisement
developer, editor, web designer, etc., and I hate looking at stuff I've
worked on after it's come back from the printer (other than the inital
glance through where I get to say, hey this looks great), because I ALWAYS
find mistakes, glaring mistakes that I can't believe I missed in the first
place. (People tell me that no one will notice, but I KNOW better. ;-)
: 5. I hate it when people have rules questions, especially legitimate rules
: questions!
Hmmm....for someone who hates rules questions, you don't seem to hesitate
when answering them.
: as my game. It's just fun. I've played dozens of games with friends Aaron
: Weissblum (who considers it one of his favorite games) and Mark Noseworthy. I
: even enjoy it despite the fact Mark wins most of the games.
I never considered that there might be people who could beat the designer
regular at his/her own game. When you design a game, do you always
understand the strategy? I guess what I'm asking is, is it possible to
design a game without fully understanding the strategy behind it? Or
would this be a detriment to the design process?
Cathy Weeks
AlanRMoon
>I never considered that there might be people who could beat the designer
>regular at his/her own game. When you design a game, do you always
>understand the strategy? I guess what I'm asking is, is it possible to
>design a game without fully understanding the strategy behind it? Or
>would this be a detriment to the design process?
>
>Cathy Weeks
>
>>>I don't think there is much correlation to designing a game and playing it
well. Heck, I often forget the rules to my own games because I can only
remember the rules to so many games. Those favorites plus the new games I'm
working on are the ones that are freshest in my mind. The published games I'm
best at are the games I play all the time. Practice making perfect and all
that. But even then, I only win my "share", not every game.
Understanding the strategy of a game doesn't guarantee I'll win either. Heck,
all the other players might understand the strategy too! (I hate when that
happens.) Then there is the random element to factor into the game. I used to
be lucky!
Finally, there is the pyschology involved. Sometimes, knowing your opponent is
much more important that knowing the strategy of the game. Playing games with
the same people over and over changes the nature of many games. It's also hard
for anyone to change their basic playing style, even when they know the
situation dictates a change (in this case, games are just like life). Not to
mention rivalries, where playing against someone else gets in the way of
winning.
But I digress.
Alan
AlanRMoon
>>The game of
>>mine I enjoy most is WER HAT MEHR?
>
>I was just curious. Do you have a favorite that you developed rather than
>designed?
>>>>I actually do have a favorite, but it's one of the new children's games
from Ravensburger for 1999 so I can't tell you about it yet.
>
>I'd bet a (New) Guinea, if we asked King Solomon, he would say it involved
>things Flat in the Mare Corallium.
>Ed Becker
>
>
>>>>Huh?
Alan
WBecker679
the redesign of "Flat Top?"
Ed
Wiyum
Your replies have been wonderful and again I must say that I love the fact
that you read the board. Your modesty is admirable, but sir, to say that you
are not one of the greats is in my eyes a gross underestimation fo yourself.
The emails and posts I have received in response to this question, which I
asked to familiarize me with the German games, have revealed to me that
there are two designers that people tell me to "buy every one of their
games, thay are all wonderful!" Those two are the aforementioned Mr. Knizia,
who many people have recommended, and you, who people have recommended
almost as frequently. Maybe the fans of the others don't read this board,
but those that do read this board love you. Don't discredit your abilities!
Will Beckley
AlanRMoon wrote in message <19981116163756...@ng-fi1.aol.com>...
>>
>>I must respect Mr. Moon for giving me a list of must haves that was
>>completely free of his own games. I really must respect that. Not only
does
>>one of the greatest designers in the industry read and post here, but he
>>reccommends the works of others rather than givingg himself credit. Thank
>>you sir!
>>
>>My only complaint is that I am curious to know which of your own games you
>>would consider "must-haves." A few have suggested Elfenlands and some
>>others, but what do you think?
>>
>>Will
>>
>
>>>Thank-you for the kind words Will, but you overestimate me. There is
simply
>no way I am one of the greatest game designers in the industry. Klaus
Teuber,
>Reiner Knizia, Sid Sackson, Wolfgang Kramer, Karl Heinz Schmiel, Francis
>Tresham, Richard Borg, these are the big guys, and it's one heck of a
major
>step up from where I am to where they are.
>
>As to what games of mine are "must-haves", I have to leave that up to
others.
>What I will tell you is that I don't play most of my games very often after
>they are published for quite a few reasons:
>
>1. When I work on a game, it becomes work. So playing it after the job is
>finished is sort of like taking a busman's holiday.
>
>2. When I play my games, too often I spend the game worrying about whether
the
>other players are enjoying themselves.
>
>3. I have a hard time seeing the good parts of the game because I see all
the
>little mistakes or things I wish I'd done differently.
>
>4. I don't learn anything from playing my own games. But even when another
game
>is bad, there is often something to be learned from it, maybe one idea that
can
>be used or modified into something else in one of my own games.
>
>5. I hate it when people have rules questions, especially legitimate rules
>questions!
>
>6. I want to experience what is out there, because besides being fun,
playing
>games is research.
>
>What was fun though was standing in the Amigo stand at Essen on the
Saturday
>and watching 50+ games of ELFENLAND being played (no exaggeration, I
counted).
>People were even playing on the floor and over in the D&D part of the
stand.
>That was a thrill.
>
>Of course, as with almost everything, there is an exception or two. The
game of
>mine I enjoy most is WER HAT MEHR? (Piatnik, 1991, long out-of-print).
>Incidentally, this game is notable as having one of the worst box covers
>ever!!! My friends call it, politically incorrectly, THE AIDS GAME. But one
of
>the reasons I enjoy it so much is because when I'm playing, I never think
of it
>as my game. It's just fun. I've played dozens of games with friends Aaron
>Weissblum (who considers it one of his favorite games) and Mark Noseworthy.
I
>even enjoy it despite the fact Mark wins most of the games.
>
>Alan R. Moon
Jeff Goldsmith
> I never considered that there might be people who could beat the designer
> regular at his/her own game. When you design a game, do you always
> understand the strategy? I guess what I'm asking is, is it possible to
> design a game without fully understanding the strategy behind it? Or
> would this be a detriment to the design process?
Being a good designer and a good player are not
the same skill. A good game will typically not
afford a solution that even the most talented
player can find. Instead, players have to guess
at the best move. These guesses are well-informed,
obviously, but if the game is good, are not known
to be best. To make a game one of skill, the
designer has to determine that the players can't
figure it out completely. It's not good enough
that the *designer* can't figure it out; he has
to ensure that all the players can't. So he gets
playtesters.
--Jeff
Yes, this is a very loose description of how
games are played/designed. Shrug.
--
# 125-50---1998 World Champs
# Go New York Yankees!
# ---
# http://www.gg.caltech.edu/~jeff
Derek
Thanks
---------
Derek
games...@geocities.com
tedd...@earthlink.net wrote in article <3650E7...@earthlink.net>...
> Jonathan Degann did it and said it works just fine....you need to make
> up some pieces though.
hu...@alctrz.enet.dec.com
Benjamin Foy <bf...@access5.digex.net> writes:
|>On 16 Nov 1998, AlanRMoon wrote:
|>
|>> As to what games of mine are "must-haves", I
|>> have to leave that up to others.
|>
|>Well if Alan won't say it, I will. Alan has one
|>game that is definitely a "must-have". That game
|>is Elfenroads. I am not talking about Elfenlands
|>which is a much simplified version of the original.
|>Elfenlands is a very good "family" game, Elfenroads
|>is a excellent "gamers" game.
As much as I enjoy Elfenroads - and I do enjoy it quite
a bit - it's never gone over exceptionally well with
my group. It's a long game - with enough players and
without tweaks, it could go 3-4 hours - whereas Santa
Fe and Freight Train consistently finish in 90 minutes
or less. (As an aside, even with what I consider to
be necessary tweaks with the 2x cards, I don't find
Reibach/Get the Goods to be nearly as good as Freight
Train, and that's the consensus or my gaming group as
well.)
So I'd say that how "must-have" Elfenroads is for you
depends a significant amount upon your gaming tastes.
Freight Train, Airlines, and even Get the Goods are
a lot easier and cheaper to try.
Joe
AlanRMoon
>>>>>>>>>>Wow. Hard to know what to say except thank-you.
Alan
Richard Dewsbery
> >completely free of his own games. I really must respect that. Not only
does
> >one of the greatest designers in the industry read and post here, but he
> >reccommends the works of others rather than givingg himself credit.
>
simply
> no way I am one of the greatest game designers in the industry. Klaus
Teuber,
> Reiner Knizia, Sid Sackson, Wolfgang Kramer, Karl Heinz Schmiel, Francis
> Tresham, Richard Borg, these are the big guys, and it's one heck of a
major
> step up from where I am to where they are.
Not sure I want to put it as blunt as this, but Alan is talking nonsense
here. With great games like Elfenland, Santa Fe and Airlines (not to
mention a host of games that only rate a "good"), I'd say he is entitled to
see himself on _exactly_ the same step as other great designers such as Dr,
Knizia, Herr Teuber etc.
It's entirely a matter of personal opinion, but I'd put him higher up the
list of all-time greats than some he mentioned (and probably for exactly
the same reasons why others would rate them higher than Alan!). What he
hasn't got is the breadth of titles issued by big publishers that some
others have - but he's certainly no "one-hit wonder", either.
Richard
hu...@alctrz.enet.dec.com
"Wiyum" <WBec...@Mindspring.com> writes to Alan:
|>The emails and posts I have received in response
|>to this question, which I asked to familiarize
|>me with the German games, have revealed to me that
|>there are two designers that people tell me to
|>"buy every one of their games, thay are all
|>wonderful!" Those two are the aforementioned
|>Mr. Knizia, who many people have recommended,
|>and you, who people have recommended almost as
|>frequently.
Heading in a different direction (I'll let the
Alan worship continue under the original title B^),
and ignoring for the moment the fact that "they
are all wonderful!" is an exaggeration to make a
point rather than an honest suggestion, the subject
of game authors whose games you'll buy blind is an
interesting one.
Tom Lehmann is probably still my favorite game author.
I _really_ want 1834 to make it out. But other than
Fast Food Franchise, none of his games fall into the
"German Game" category.
In the "German Game" authors category, the names that
I tend to look for are (in alphabetical order):
Steffan Dorra
Dirk Henn
Reiner Knizia
Wolfgang Kramer
Alan Moon
Frank Nestel
Alex Randolph
Uwe Rosenberg
Sid Sackson
Karl-Heinz Schmiel
Klaus Teuber
Others might suggest Reinhard Staupe or others, but
these 11 are the names that catch _my_ attention.
Going through one at a time...
Steffan Dorra:
Best game I've played - Marracash
Worst game I've played - Um Kopf und Kragen
Overall - I've really enjoyed most of Dorra's
games. Even those I've been less fond
of aren't unbearable, in the right mood.
Dirk Henn:
Best game I've played - Iron Horse
Worst game I've played - Carat
Overall - I've played 5 of Henn's games, and
would play any of them again willingly.
Reiner Knizia:
Best game I've played - Tigris & Euphrates
Worst game I've played - Ferkelei
Overall - A very mixed bag; there are a number
of Knizia's games I don't like, and a
number I enjoy, but not enough so that
they get played often. Until T&E came
out, there wasn't a Knizia game that
really captured me.
Wolfgang Kramer:
Best game I've played - El Grande
Worst game I've played - hard to say - Das
Phantom and Terra Turrium are prime
suspects
Overall - Much as with Knizia, it's a mixed
bag. However, Kramer's best games work
better for me than Knizia's best, and
his worst are more painful than
Knizia's worst
Alan Moon:
Best game I've played - Elfenroads
Worst game I've played - Mush
Overall - Has designed as many of my favorites
as Kramer (in addition to Elfenroads,
Santa Fe and Freight Train are
wonderful games), but without the
misfires.
Frank Nestel:
Best game I've played - Ursuppe
Worst game I've played - Esels Rennen
Overall - Getting better all the time. Mue and
Ursuppe are among my favorite games.
Alex Randolph:
Best game I've played - In Tuefel's Kueche
Worst game I've played - Mini Inkognito
Overall - Lots of good games, but nothing that
really stands out for me.
Uwe Rosenberg:
Best game I've played - Schnaeppchen Jagd
Worst game I've played - Bohnanza
Overall - OK, I've only played two of his
games, but one is on my top ten list,
and the other is at least close. And
this isn't even just new game
infatuation going on, since I've played
one 35 times and the other 33.
Sid Sackson:
Best game I've played - Acquire
Worst game I've played - Black Monday
Overall - Very similar to Randolph. I enjoy
some games that each has put out, but
I appreciate them more for their
ideas and inventions rather than for
their games.
Karl-Heinz Schmiel:
Best game I've played - Extrablatt
Worst game I've played - Lieber Baerisch
Sterben
Overall - I do very well with short Schmiel
games, much less well with long ones.
Klaus Teuber:
Best game I've played - Die Siedler von Catan
Worst game I've played - Vernissage
Overall - Other than Die Siedler, Teuber's
never really captured me. Some of
his other games are minor favorites -
Entdecker, for instance - but any of
them would be the weakest "best game
I've played" on this list. (Well,
maybe better than In Teufel's Kueche,
but even that's close.)
I look for new games by all 11 of these gentlemen
(where are the great women game designers, btw?).
Assuming the theme appeals, I'd buy a game from Dorra,
Henn, Moon, or Nestel blind. At the moment, I'll buy
a Rosenberg game blind in _spite_ of the theme, but
I'm sure this will pass.
Joe
the Dave
<hu...@alctrz.enet.dec.com> wrote:
>Tom Lehmann is probably still my favorite game author.
>I _really_ want 1834 to make it out. But other than
>Fast Food Franchise, none of his games fall into the
>"German Game" category.
What about Suzerain?
John R. Cooper
<ric...@NOSPAMdewsbery.globalnet.co.uk> wrote:
>It's entirely a matter of personal opinion, but I'd put him higher up the
>list of all-time greats than some he mentioned (and probably for exactly
>the same reasons why others would rate them higher than Alan!).
Well, Alan will always occupy a special place in my wargaming heart for
the humor pieces he did for The General almost 20 years ago. When I read
"My games have not come today..." I laughed so hard I couldn't breathe. It
also felt good to know there were other new-game-junkies out there too. :)
Cheers,
- John
Michael Svellov
> Well, Alan will always occupy a special place in my wargaming
heart for
>the humor pieces he did for The General almost 20 years ago. When I
read
>"My games have not come today..." I laughed so hard I couldn't
breathe. It
>also felt good to know there were other new-game-junkies out there
too. :)
My favorite was the one headlined:
"Not Tonight Dear, I Just Got The General" :-)
Mik
jmk...@my-dejanews.com
nos...@nospam.com (John R. Cooper) wrote:
>
> Well, Alan will always occupy a special place in my wargaming heart for
> the humor pieces he did for The General almost 20 years ago. When I read
> "My games have not come today..." I laughed so hard I couldn't breathe. It
> also felt good to know there were other new-game-junkies out there too. :)
>
> - John
>
Hate to say it, but most of those articles came out more than 20 years ago.
And they *do* remain some of the funniest game-related writing I've ever
seen!
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
hvo...@metrois.com
jmk...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> In article <366349a9...@netnews.worldnet.att.net>,
> nos...@nospam.com (John R. Cooper) wrote:
> >
> > Well, Alan will always occupy a special place in my wargaming heart for
> > the humor pieces he did for The General almost 20 years ago. When I read
> > "My games have not come today..." I laughed so hard I couldn't breathe. It
> > also felt good to know there were other new-game-junkies out there too. :)
> >
> > Cheers,
> > - John
> >
>
> Hate to say it, but most of those articles came out more than 20 years ago.
> And they *do* remain some of the funniest game-related writing I've ever
> seen!
Is there any way, other than tracking down old copies of The General, to read
these gems? They sound great!
Henry
spet...@my-dejanews.com
are much revered by core game
enthusiasts, but they are eclipsed by
the popular board games of lesser
known inventors.
BRUCE STERTEN, inventor of
"Taboo," "25 Words or Less," and
"Rapid Recall." "Taboo" was the top
selling game in Germany in 1997.
"25 Words or Less" won Games
Magazine's "Game of the Year" award
in 1997. Bruce lives near Monterey,
California.
JAY MORIARTY, inventor of "221-B
Baker Street." This classic detective
game is now in its twenty-sixth year
of continuous publication. Jay lives
with his wife Linda in Los Angeles
where he writes television sitcoms.
Jay also wrote and produced the
popular television series, "The
Jeffersons."
TIM WALSH; Inventor of "Tri-Bond,"
and "Blurt." Tim heads the
development department for Patch
Products in Beloit, Wisconsin where
he also resides.
All of these inventors have produced
successful board games which have
gone "gold," selling over one million
copies. None of them have yet been
recognized by core game resources
like "The Game Cabinet," "The Game
Report," or "Luding."
Prominent web-zines posting to
rec.games.board would do well to
recognize the achievements of
popular board game inventors.
Scott Peterson
Mendocino Game Company
http://www.pirateer.com
spet...@mcn.yourself.org
(delete yourself)
Hero93
>successful board games which have
>gone "gold," selling over one million
>copies
Just curious, Scott, what kind of money does that translate into? If I had
just invented, say, Taboo, and only Taboo, would I be rich, rich, I tell you...
or just comfortable? And how long does that last, i.e.:
>JAY MORIARTY, inventor of "221-B
>Baker Street." This classic detective
>game is now in its twenty-sixth year
>of continuous publication
After 26 years, what is Jay's annual take now for this game, do you guess?
-Dave
hvo...@metrois.com
spet...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> Alan Moon's board game inventions
> are much revered by core game
> enthusiasts, but they are eclipsed by
> the popular board games of lesser
> known inventors.
They are eclipsed in sales, I believe you mean. The relative quality of a
game is rather subjective. You may find the games listed below to be of
higher quality than Alan Moon's games (note, I use "may" because I do not
know your actual opinion on this matter). I would disagree with such an
opinion. That doesn't make either of us wrong. It simply means that we have
different tastes.
> BRUCE STERTEN, inventor of
> "Taboo," "25 Words or Less," and
> "Rapid Recall." "Taboo" was the top
> selling game in Germany in 1997.
> "25 Words or Less" won Games
> Magazine's "Game of the Year" award
> in 1997. Bruce lives near Monterey,
> California.
>
> JAY MORIARTY, inventor of "221-B
> Baker Street." This classic detective
> game is now in its twenty-sixth year
> of continuous publication. Jay lives
> with his wife Linda in Los Angeles
> where he writes television sitcoms.
> Jay also wrote and produced the
> popular television series, "The
> Jeffersons."
>
> TIM WALSH; Inventor of "Tri-Bond,"
> and "Blurt." Tim heads the
> development department for Patch
> Products in Beloit, Wisconsin where
> he also resides.
Here's a simple question: Did the names of any of these game inventors appear
on the games they invented? I honestly don't know as none of the games
interested me enough to purchase them. (I've played most of them with
friends using their copies. The games did not appeal to me enough to buy
them.) If the names didn't appear on the games, how are most people supposed
to even know who to credit with the invention of the game?
> All of these inventors have produced
> successful board games which have
> gone "gold," selling over one million
> copies. None of them have yet been
> recognized by core game resources
> like "The Game Cabinet," "The Game
> Report," or "Luding."
This, I believe, is one of the major differences between you and most readers
of RGB. Your messages always revolve around sales and marketing -- I have
never even seen you discuss the play of your own game. Most of the messages
posted by other readers of RGB revolve around game play. Sales are not
always indicative of quality. If they were then the best novel ever written
would be "The Valley of the Dolls" and the greatest movie of all time would
be "Titanic".
It is this point, sales and marketing versus game play, that forms the crux
of the disagreements you've been involved in. "The Game Cabinet", "The Game
Report", "Luding", and RGB are all directed towards game play. Arguing that
they should recognize games solely based on sales would be akin to me asking
you why Mendocino Games doesn't sell roast beef sandwiches. Both involve
asking the organizations to ignore the primary reason they exist (Mendocino
to sell Pirateer, the others to discuss game play).
> Prominent web-zines posting to
> rec.games.board would do well to
> recognize the achievements of
> popular board game inventors.
Why? There really aren't that many game designers who get much direct
discussion here. Alan Moon, who designs games that are popular with
contributors to RGB and also contributes to the discussions here, is one.
Knizia, who designs games that generally prove to be very popular RGBers, is
another. And, of course, Sid Sackson's name comes up regularly. But until
you see discussions in this news group concerning the games listed above
there is no reason for the names of their designers to come up either.
> Scott Peterson
> Mendocino Game Company
> http://www.pirateer.com
>
> spet...@mcn.yourself.org
> (delete yourself)
Please, Scott, stop trying to turn this newsgroup into something it is not.
I don't know about you, but I read this newsgroup to find out about PLAYING
games, not marketing them.
Henry
Zen Bitz
-
> rec.games.board would do well to
> recognize the achievements of
> popular board game inventors.
I propose that we rename the newgroup rec.games.board.unpopular,
that way Peterson can take his budding, insightful
discussions of Taboo, Monopoly, 221 Baker Street and other stupid
mindless pastimes, and thier insipid designers, that, are, by god,
POPULAR, and form hisown group.
How come no one ever discusses Chutes and Ladders strategy
here?
Oh, what a mystery!
--
**********************************************
* PLEASE BEFORE READING THIS PAGE, *
* DOUBLE CLICK ON HIGHLIGHTED SUBJECT AREA *
* TO VIEW LETTER IN FULL SCREEN *
**********************************************
Remove BRAIN to email Remove BRAIN to email Remove BRAIN to
Ben Hitz -- Do not reply Directly -- Dept. of Biochemistry
*** http://tincan.bioc.columbia.edu/Home/ben.home/ ***
Dave Green
> rec.games.board would do well to
> recognize the achievements of
> popular board game inventors.
>
The designers that you mention might very well be nice people Scott. Even
worthy of discussion and praise. (I have my copy of taboo sitting here
next to me ready to be played tonight at a dinner party)
But one thing for sure is that your postings are WAY WAY WAY annoying. I
find it hard to believe that you could post the things that you do with a
straight face. I have avoided your posts for so long because I thought
they were simple flame-bait. But finally I have to add my 2-cents.
I think that you miss the point of the original thread entirely when you
try and turn it into a "why don't you all discuss and praise the games that
go gold". The original discussion of Alan and others was a sort of
appreciation for the people who make games that really matter to us; the
games that are Gold in our heart, not at the cash register. Sure, I have
Taboo and 25 words or less in the closet and they come out for play with my
in-laws and the neighbors after the barbeque or what not..... I also have
about 5 or 6 221B expansions and play it all of the time for something
light to do.... But when you ask me what games really capture my
imagination and feelings, none of the games you mention are likely to be on
my list.
Admittedly, the subject line and some of the postings were a bit flowery,
but it was just an attempt to say something NICE to/about the designers of
games that the original poster(s) felt personally touched by.
whew!
Dave
dkuz...@my-dejanews.com
hvo...@metrois.com wrote:
[Scott Peterson's pearls of wisdom snipped]
> This, I believe, is one of the major differences between you and most readers
> of RGB. Your messages always revolve around sales and marketing -- I have
> never even seen you discuss the play of your own game.
Simple explanation for that. Having ones head permanently glued up the ole
rectal passage precludes intelligent talk. Sales and marketing speak has no
such hinderance.
-- David Kuznick dkuz...@gensym.com or dkuz...@world.std.com
The Maverick
>
> Alan Moon's board game inventions
> are much revered by core game
> enthusiasts, but they are eclipsed by
> the popular board games of lesser
> known inventors.
What an insulting and moronic post. Oh, never mind the redundancy, I
just saw who the author was... ;-)
the Mav
--
THE SPACE AND FANTASY GAMER'S GUIDE http://www.brainiac.com/micro/sfgg/
The guide is a comprehensive game index for the magazines Space Gamer,
Fantasy Gamer, Ares, Interplay, Nexus and VIP of Gaming.
NEW! INTERPLAY #1 will be given away with the first 25 copies sold!
fabi...@my-dejanews.com
> > Scott Peterson
> In article <3667EDC7...@valley.net>,
dave....@valley.net wrote:
> But one thing for sure is that your postings are WAY WAY WAY annoying. I
> find it hard to believe that you could post the things that you do with a
> straight face. I have avoided your posts for so long because I thought
> they were simple flame-bait. But finally I have to add my 2-cents.
[Diatribe snipped]
> whew!
Amen! Preach on Brother Dave!
Derk, the r.g.b. lurker.
spet...@my-dejanews.com
19981204052752.24210.0000198
2...@ng116.aol.com>,
her...@aol.com (Hero93) wrote:
> Just curious, Scott, what kind of
> money does that translate into? If I
> had just invented, say, Taboo, and
> only Taboo, would I be rich, rich, I
> tell you... or just comfortable? And
> how long does that last, i.e.:
It depends on whether it's a core or
popular game and how well it sells.
An 'average' core game will sell
something like 5,000 copies over its
lifetime, a 'hit' will sell 50,000 and a
'blockbuster' will sell 500,000
copies. Assuming a wholesale price
of $10 and a royalty of 7%, proceeds
to the inventor of a core game would
probably range between $3,500 and
$350,000.
An 'average' popular game will sell
50,000 copies over its lifetime, a 'hit'
will sell 500,000 and a 'blockbuster'
will sell 5 million copies. Assuming
the same wholesale price and
royalty, proceeds to the inventor of a
popular game would probably range
between $35,000 and $3.5 million.
> After 26 years, what is Jay's annual
> take now for this game, do you
> guess?
I'd guess about $750,000 total, or
about $30,000 per year, average.
Scott Peterson
Mendocino Game Company
http://www.pirateer.com
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
David desJardins
> All of these inventors have produced successful board games which have
> gone "gold," selling over one million copies. None of them have yet
> been recognized by core game resources like "The Game Cabinet," "The
> Game Report," or "Luding."
I'm pretty sure that the people who build gaming sites emphasize the
games that they personally are interested in. There's no reason that
other people can't build other sites. Why don't you build a site with
reviews and discussion of such "family" games and designers, if that's
what you find interesting?
David desJardins
Jeff Goldsmith
>
> In article <366349a9...@netnews.worldnet.att.net>,
> nos...@nospam.com (John R. Cooper) wrote:
> >
> > Well, Alan will always occupy a special place in my wargaming heart for
> > the humor pieces he did for The General almost 20 years ago. When I read
> > "My games have not come today..." I laughed so hard I couldn't breathe. It
> > also felt good to know there were other new-game-junkies out there too. :)
> >
> > Cheers,
> > - John
> >
>
> Hate to say it, but most of those articles came out more than 20 years ago.
> And they *do* remain some of the funniest game-related writing I've ever
> seen!
Hmmmm...now that Hasbro owns AH, perhaps someone can talk
them into reprinting them on the web. Or maybe Alan can
get his copyright back and post them himself somehow?
--Jeff
Stefanie Kethers
> All of these inventors have produced
> successful board games which have
> gone "gold," selling over one million
> copies. None of them have yet been
> recognized by core game resources
> like "The Game Cabinet," "The Game
> Report," or "Luding."
Actually, I have just included those authors and their games.
I didn't know about them; the German Tabu does not have an author's name
on the box, and I must admit I had never seen the other games
mentioned in the posting (apart from 221B Baker Street).
Regards,
Stefanie
--
----------------------------------------------------------------
Stefanie Kethers
Luding Administration
e-mail: lud...@sunsite.informatik.rwth-aachen.de
URL: http://sunsite.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/luding/
spet...@my-dejanews.com
748po7$51g$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.c
om>, hvo...@metrois.com wrote:
> They are eclipsed in sales, I believe
> you mean. The relative quality of a
> game is rather subjective. You may
> find the games listed below to be
> of higher quality than Alan Moon's
> games (note, I use "may" because I
> do not know your actual opinion on
> this matter). I would disagree with
> such an opinion. That doesn't
> make either of us wrong. It simply
> means that we have different
> tastes.
Sales volumes are a pretty good
indication of the popularity of any
product. Beany Babies aren't any
better than Barbie dolls, but they're
both legitimate topics for discussion
on rec.toys.dolls.
> Here's a simple question: Did the
> names of any of these game
> inventors appear on the games
> they invented? I honestly don't
> know as none of the games
> interested me enough to purchase
> them. (I've played most of them
> with friends using their copies.
> The games did not appeal to me
> enough to buy them.) If the names
> didn't appear on the games, how
> are most people supposed to even
> know who to credit with the
> invention of the game?
Jay Moriarty's name appears on my
copy of the box cover and rule book
for "221-B Baker Street." Games
Magazine gave Bruce Sterten credit
for "Taboo" and "25 Words or Less"
in their "Games 100" write-up, but I
don't know if he's mentioned on any
of the products. I don't have any
information about Tim Walsh's name
on "TriBond" or "Blurt."
> This, I believe, is one of the major
> differences between you and most
> readers of RGB. Your messages
> always revolve around sales and
> marketing -- I have never even
> seen you discuss the play of your
> own game. Most of the messages
> posted by other readers of RGB
> revolve around game play. Sales
> are not always indicative of quality.
> If they were then the best novel
> ever written would be "The Valley
> of the Dolls" and the greatest
> movie of all time would be "Titanic".
>
> It is this point, sales and marketing
> versus game play, that forms the
> crux of the disagreements you've
> been involved in. "The Game
> Cabinet", "The Game Report",
> "Luding", and RGB are all directed
> towards game play. Arguing that
> they should recognize games
> solely based on sales would be
> akin to me asking you why
> Mendocino Games doesn't sell
> roast beef sandwiches. Both
> involve asking the organizations to
> ignore the primary reason they
> exist (Mendocino to sell Pirateer,
> the others to discuss game play).
Sales and marketing is the least
subjective way to define different
types of board games. Sales and
marketing for core games is different
than it is for popular games. "Spiel
des Jahres" awards for core games
aren't better (or worse) than "Mensa"
awards for popular games. They
distinguish different types of board
games, both of which are appropriate
for discussion on r.g.b.
> Why? There really aren't that many
> game designers who get much
> direct discussion here. Alan Moon,
> who designs games that are
> popular with contributors to RGB
> and also contributes to the
> discussions here, is one. Knizia,
> who designs games that generally
> prove to be very popular RGBers,
> is another. And, of course, Sid
> Sackson's name comes up
> regularly. But until you see
> discussions in this news group
> concerning the games listed
> above there is no reason for the
> names of their designers to come
> up either.
It's ridiculous to say that particular
board games or their inventors
should or shouldn't be discussed on
rec.games.board. The subject matter
on r.g.b. is very broad and I think
there's plenty of room for diversity.
> Please, Scott, stop trying to turn
> this newsgroup into something it is
> not. I don't know about you, but I
> read this newsgroup to find out
> about PLAYING games, not
> marketing them.
RGB is a discussion about board
games. If you don't like articles about
board game marketing, then ignore
them.
spet...@my-dejanews.com
3667EDC7...@valley.net,
dave....@valley.net wrote:
> The designers that you mention
> might very well be nice people
> Scott. Even worthy of discussion
> and praise. (I have my copy of
> taboo sitting here next to me ready
> to be played tonight at a dinner
> party)
>
> But one thing for sure is that your
> postings are WAY WAY WAY
> annoying. I find it hard to believe
> that you could post the things that
> you do with a straight face. I have
> avoided your posts for so long
> because I thought they were
> simple flame-bait. But finally I have
> to add my 2-cents.
>
If you find my articles about popular
board games to be"WAY WAY WAY
annoying," you should probably
ignore them.
If you want more successful core
board games that will be "Gold in
(y)our heart," you should probably
support discussions about sales,
marketing and promotion.
If you want a forum that will be "NICE"
to your favorite game designers, you
should probably encourage more
kindness and tolerance to others
with whom you may disagree.
That's my 2 cents worth.
Erwin Broens
>are much revered by core game
>enthusiasts, but they are eclipsed by
>the popular board games of lesser
>known inventors.
[snip]
>Prominent web-zines posting to
>rec.games.board would do well to
>recognize the achievements of
>popular board game inventors.
>
>Scott Peterson
>Mendocino Game Company
I was wondering what Puppy the Privateer was
doing. It has been rather quiet on the frustration
and complaints front. I suppose that you need
a fresh outlet for frustration, now that Avalon
Hill is (temporarily) on hold.
In the Netherlands Elfenland is much more than
a game for the core gamers. It is sold to the public
in general, national papers have placed reviews,
large companies have picked it up as an ideal
X-mas gift for their business relations, et cetera.
You would do well to recognize Elfenland the
achievement of a popular board game inventor!
Erwin
Hero93
.>> guess?
.
.> I'd guess about $750,000 total, or about $30,000 per year, average.
.
."annual". "now". As in "What's his annual income now from that
.game?" Not what's his total take, nor what has been his average
.annual take since the game's release.
Actually, this answer is good enough for me. If the $750,000 guess is right,
then the $30,000 a year (on average) probably means he made more than $30,000
the first couple of years, and less than $30,000 for the last 10 or 15. I
realize this could be a *wide* swing (say, $250,000 the first year with only
$50 for this year), but as I read the post, I realized the royalty figure and
the average total sales was all I was really looking for.
-Dave
Paul Klimstra
: Sales volumes are a pretty good
: indication of the popularity of any
: product. Beany Babies aren't any
: better than Barbie dolls, but they're
: both legitimate topics for discussion
: on rec.toys.dolls.
But are discussions concerning marketing curves, advertising budgets and
profit margins well received on r.t.d.? Or, like r.g.b, are the people who
post there more interested in the _hobby_ than the sales figures? Would a
discussion of the projected Christmas sale earnings of Furbies be received
with saupport, or derision?
--
{------------------------------------------------------------------------}
{ dutc...@hwcn.org }
{------------------------------------------------------------------------}
{ There's a reason why tree huggers hate fur more than leather...it's }
{ a lot easier to pick on rich women than members of a biker gang. }
{------------------------------------------------------------------------}
spet...@my-dejanews.com
91284905...@big.hacom.nl,
"Erwin Broens" ebr...@hacom.nl
wrote:
> I was wondering what Puppy the
> Privateer was doing. It has been
> rather quiet on the frustration
> and complaints front. I suppose
> that you need a fresh outlet for
> frustration, now that Avalon
> Hill is (temporarily) on hold.
Avalon Hill isn't "temporarily on hold,"
they're dead. Over 250 core game
titles have been scrapped by Hasbro
for less than a dozen to be
repackaged and sold in the mass
market. AH made big mistakes and
cashed out, leaving all the
"frustration and complaints" for their
former distributers, retailers and
customers.
> In the Netherlands Elfenland is
> much more than a game for the
> core gamers. It is sold to the public
> in general, national papers have
> placed reviews, large companies
> have picked it up as an ideal
> X-mas gift for their business
> relations, et cetera. You would do
> well to recognize Elfenland the
> achievement of a popular board
> game inventor!
Alan Moon's games have been
available to the "public in general"
here for two decades. His games
have been favored by national
publications and awards and they
have gotten the best distribution that
the core game market could provide.
That didn't keep his own company,
White Wind, from going belly up too.
I recognize the achievement of Mr.
Moon for his recent Elfenland award
and congratulate him for it. But while
Alan may be "popular" among
gamers, his games are still core
games, which are a very small part of
the board game category.
Scott Peterson
Mendocino Game Company
Larry Welborn
spet...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
>
> If you want more successful core
> board games that will be "Gold in
> (y)our heart," you should probably
> support discussions about sales,
> marketing and promotion.
>
> If you want a forum that will be "NICE"
> to your favorite game designers, you
> should probably encourage more
> kindness and tolerance to others
> with whom you may disagree.
>
Scott,
How exactly does discussion about "sales, marketing and promotion" of games
help the posters of this group? It doesn't help me play a game better. It
doesn't help me find out about games that I may like. It doesn't let me
know the relative merits of the game.
As for as game designers, I think most any of them are welcomed here to
discuss their games or other games for that matter. I do think that
discussion of "Taboo", "Trivial Pursuit", "Clue" or any other "popular"
game is appropriate on this board. Whether or not these games threads
would receive much discussion would depend on the others posting to this
group. "Axis & Allies" is a popular game that gets a lot of discussion
here. But if designers come here and constantly make derogatory remarks
about gamers or any other segment of the population, they will probably not
be well received.
Regards,
Larry
--
Note: To Reply remove "Not" from the e-mail address
spet...@my-dejanews.com
74bjuv$nlt$1...@mohawk.hwcn.org>,
ab...@freenet.hamilton.on.ca
(Paul Klimstra) wrote:
> But are discussions concerning
> marketing curves, advertising
> budgets and profit margins well
> received on r.t.d.? Or, like r.g.b, are
> the people who post there more
> interested in the _hobby_ than the
> sales figures? Would a discussion
> of the projected Christmas sale
> earnings of Furbies be received
> with saupport, or derision?
News is news. If you don't like the
business section of your favorite
newspaper, it's your choice not to
read it. Discussions pertaining to any
aspect of board games are
appropriate on rec.games.board
regardless of whether they are
"received with saupport, or derision."
spet...@my-dejanews.com
366964B3.F5E15026@notmindspr
ing.com>, Larry Welborn
larryw...@notmindspring.com>
wrote:
> How exactly does discussion about
> "sales, marketing and promotion"
> of games help the posters of this
> group? It doesn't help me play a
> game better. It doesn't help me
> find out about games that I may
> like. It doesn't let me know the
> relative merits of the game.
I've used facts about sales and
marketing to illustrate the differences
between core games and popular
games. Besides people who play
board games, this newsgroup is
frequented by board game inventors
and self-publishers who may benefit
from these discussions.
> As for as game designers, I think
> most any of them are welcomed
> here to discuss their games or
> other games for that matter. I do
> think that discussion of "Taboo",
> "Trivial Pursuit", "Clue" or any other
> "popular" game is appropriate on
> this board. Whether or not these
> games threads would receive
> much discussion would depend on
> the others posting to this group.
> "Axis & Allies" is a popular game
> that gets a lot of discussion
> here. But if designers come here
> and constantly make derogatory
> remarks about gamers or any other
> segment of the population, they
> will probably not be well received.
My observations about core gamers
being may not be well received by
core gamer community here, but
they are relevant to a discussion
about two distinct groups of
individuals who play board games.
John Kovalic's "Dork Towers" is
another snapshot of core gamers
which isn't very well received here,
but it's still relevant. It's also very
funny.
John is also the game reviewer for
the Wisconsin State Journal in
Madison. Hey, John! Which board
games got the top spots in your
Holiday game reviews this year?
Larry Welborn
spet...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
>
> I've used facts about sales and
> marketing to illustrate the differences
> between core games and popular
> games. Besides people who play
> board games, this newsgroup is
> frequented by board game inventors
> and self-publishers who may benefit
> from these discussions.
>
In what ways can discussion of sales benefit self publishers? I think most
everyone knows that "Monopoly" outsells "ASL". Specifically, what advice
do you offer for a self publisher to improve sales, other than "get your
game published by Hasbro"?
>
>
> My observations about core gamers
> being may not be well received by
> core gamer community here, but
> they are relevant to a discussion
> about two distinct groups of
> individuals who play board games.
Again, I specifically ask how this is relevant? First of all, all "core
gamers" aren't alike. And to make silly stereotypical statements about any
group does not add to a discussion but merely shows a person's prejudice.
It is wrong to make derogatory blanket statements about ethnic groups or
nationalities; it is no less wrong to make derogatory statements about
groups with whom you may disagree.
But, what is your definition of a "core gamer"? Most of the ones I know
are married professionals with advanced college degrees. They tend to work
full-time and try to play games on a semi-regular basis. I am not sure why
you find it necessary to rip into this "group of core gamers" on a regular
basis.
Bob Scherer-Hoock
> Scott Peterson
> Mendocino Game Company
I am not a game designer nor do I hold any other professional position in
the game industry, so I certainly cannot claim the expertise of other
esteemed commentators in this discussion. But I do make a living trying to
separate fact from fiction and I cannot let certain falsehoods go
unchallenged.
Chief among these is the statement that Alan Moon's White Wind company went
"belly up." While it is probably fair to say Alan was only able to eke out
a meager living with White Wind, it's also true that for the five years of
its existence White Wind was his full-time job, his only job and it was
successful enough to keep him warm and fed. When it ended it did so not
because the creditors had come knocking, bankruptcy was in the offing or
because the wolves were at the door. It ended because it required a lot of
effort in areas other than game design in which Alan prefers not to expend
energy and it had served its purpose. It was never intended that White Wind
make huge amounts of money (Can't be done when you're making two games a
year and only 1,200 copies of each). The purpose was for Alan to expose his
designs to the German market (his gaming tastes had turned overseas from
his Avalon Hll war game days of two decades ago), begin to make a name for
himself there, and hopefully have either a White Wind game or some other
design picked up by a major German game publisher once he did have a
reputation there.
White Wind was designed as a marketing device, not a get-rich scheme, and I
would like to assert that it was highly successful in this respect.
Elfenroads sold many more copies in Germany than it ever did in the U.S.,
was picked up by a larger publisher and reissued as Elfenland, won Game of
the Year in over there, will sell tens of thousands of copies this year
alone, and will lead to the inevitable expansion and perhaps a sequel. Now
that Alan has a track record with a larger German publisher, other White
Wind and previously unpublished designs will follow. Alan has told me that
in 1999 alone he expects to have 9 to 13 games come out with his name on
it, running the gamut from pure children's games to family games to gamers'
games. Did White Wind serve its purpose? I believe so.
Second fallacy: that Alan's games have been "available to the public in
general" for two decades. Here is a list of Alan's games from Luding:
Airlines, 1990; Bidwise, 1997; Black Spy, 1981; Chestnuts Roasting On An
Open
Fire, 1996; Elfengold, 1991; Elfenland, 1998; Elfenroads, 1992;
Elfenwizards, 1995;
Fishy, 1991; Freight Train, 1993; Freight Train, 1996; Gespenster, 1990;
Get The Goods, 1997; Mush, 1994; Pacific Theatre via Midway, 1979;
Pony-Express, 1991; Rainbows, 1995; Reibach&Co., 1996; Santa Fé, 1992;
Starting Lineup Talking Baseball, 1988; Strings, 1997; Superstart Lineup
Talking, 1988; Tricks, 1995; U.F.O.s, 1992; War at Sea II, 1980; Wer hat
mehr, 1990.
I count five games produced before 1991. Two were war games intended for an
acknowledged niche audience and not a mass general audience. One was an
Avalon Hill card game produced at a time when AH was giving the back of its
hand to its non-war games (if in fact it ever did otherwise). Two others
were Parker Bros. electronic games that like most U.S. games were
uncredited. They sold thousands, successful by any standards except Parker
and MB which won't continue a product unless it sells hundreds of thousands
(It will be interesting to see how the current incarnation of MB and
Parker, aka Hasbro, handles AH titles in this respect. I can't help but
think of what happened when they bought the rights to Formel Eins, by the
very successful designer Wolfgang Kramer, issued it in the U.S. as Daytona
500, and dropped it after less than a year because it sold "only" 150,000,
but I digress). I would suggest that not until the 1996 Mayfair edition of
Freight Train has an Alan Moon game, of the type he has turned to designing
in the '90s, been readily available to the general public. The rest were
either produced in Germany or, in the case of White Wind, sold in the U.S.
directly by the designer himself. Certainly they have not been available to
the public in general for "two decades". In fact, they are only now
becoming available in the United States as more German games are imported
by U.S. shops and distributors, or reissued in English by U.S. companies.
(But the German games will never, ever have significant U.S. sales as most
distributors and shops won't touch anything unless it has English on the
box.).
Third falsehood: And this is an implied one in other postings, that there
is only one legitimate means of marketing a game and measuring its success,
and that's the Pirateer model. This isn't even worth debating.
I am a (I hope a good) friend of Alan Moon's. I know he is reading this
thread, but he is too polite to step into a discussion that was set up to
be a pissing contest between designers. He does not know I'm posting this
and may well prefer that I don't, but I couldn't let comments that are
blatantly false go uncorrected.
Bob Scherer-Hoock
Brandon Freels
says...
>
> I've used facts about sales and
> marketing to illustrate the differences
> between core games and popular
> games. Besides people who play
> board games, this newsgroup is
> frequented by board game inventors
> and self-publishers who may benefit
> from these discussions.
>
Unfortunately from posts and actions made by you in the past, you have shown
me what NOT TO DO in order to promote my game in a favorable light on
rec.games.board.
--
Domo. Ja na.
Brandon Freels
(bra...@rhinoventures.com, ICQ#: 2695168, Online-Gaming: Spittledung)
"I'm witty naturally. I don't need quotes!"
GOLEM Web Slab: http://www.rhinoventures.com/golem/
Aristophanes
> In article <
> 366964B3.F5E15026@notmindspr
> ing.com>, Larry Welborn
> larryw...@notmindspring.com>
> wrote:
>
> > How exactly does discussion about
> > "sales, marketing and promotion"
> > of games help the posters of this
> > group? It doesn't help me play a
> > game better. It doesn't help me
> > find out about games that I may
> > like. It doesn't let me know the
> > relative merits of the game.
>
> I've used facts about sales and
> marketing to illustrate the differences
> between core games and popular
> games. Besides people who play
> board games, this newsgroup is
> frequented by board game inventors
> and self-publishers who may benefit
> from these discussions.
I think it's an artificial difference.
First, what is "gold" for one market, say, the U.S. may not be the same for
another market, say, Germany. In the U.S. I watch on T.V. the simplest,
dullest, games get prime time marketing pushes (Yahtzee, Clue, etc.) during
this Christmas season. It's not about "gold" or "core" values; it's about
limiting choices to a certain class of products with low complexity but
high margins.
Germany (and most other European countries) have better educated consumers
who make more of an investment in games and hence are more discerning
consumers overall. They therefore are less likely to be sold ont eh merits
of the marketing program and are more likely to sek opinion form game
colummns, clubs, or word-of-mouth before buying.
In the U.S. it's an adherence to the brand name; in Germany to the designer
or sometimes the publishing house.
> My observations about core gamers
> being may not be well received by
> core gamer community here, but
> they are relevant to a discussion
> about two distinct groups of
> individuals who play board games.
> John Kovalic's "Dork Towers" is
> another snapshot of core gamers
> which isn't very well received here,
> but it's still relevant. It's also very
> funny.
I think your points are valid, but within only a VERY limited context.
I might also point out that most "popular" games in the "gold" markets you
descrie are simple designs with simple strategies. What about the "core"
gamers who pushed a game like Magic the Gathering -- which is very complex
with multiple designs and strategies -- to game sales heights never seen
before?
Again, your distinction is artificial.
"Facts" pertaining to marketing don't tell you much about a game and its
design at all, just about the marketing.
Kevin J. Maroney
>> Alan Moon's board game inventions
>> are much revered by core game
>> enthusiasts, but they are eclipsed by
>> the popular board games of lesser
>> known inventors.
>
>What an insulting and moronic post. Oh, never mind the redundancy, I
>just saw who the author was... ;-)
I'm just trying to guess who some of the "lesser known inventors"
are--would that be Anonymous, or Trade Secret, or Our Games Are
Invented by the Company, the top designers at Parker Brothers and
Milton Bradley?
--
Kevin J. Maroney | Crossover Technologies | kmar...@crossover.com
Games are my entire waking life.
Kevin J. Maroney
>I am a (I hope a good) friend of Alan Moon's. I know he is reading this
>thread, but he is too polite to step into a discussion that was set up to
>be a pissing contest between designers. He does not know I'm posting this
>and may well prefer that I don't, but I couldn't let comments that are
>blatantly false go uncorrected.
Bravo, Bob.
hvo...@metrois.com
spet...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> In article <<snip>
> > Why? There really aren't that many
> > game designers who get much
> > direct discussion here. Alan Moon,
> > who designs games that are
> > popular with contributors to RGB
> > and also contributes to the
> > discussions here, is one. Knizia,
> > who designs games that generally
> > prove to be very popular RGBers,
> > is another. And, of course, Sid
> > Sackson's name comes up
> > regularly. But until you see
> > discussions in this news group
> > concerning the games listed
> > above there is no reason for the
> > names of their designers to come
> > up either.
>
> It's ridiculous to say that particular
> board games or their inventors
> should or shouldn't be discussed on
> rec.games.board. The subject matter
> on r.g.b. is very broad and I think
> there's plenty of room for diversity.
I'll grant you that, Scott. Perhaps a better question should be, "Why did
you feel it necessary to post your original message, a message written rather
agressive language, to this thread?" The original thread was started by a
person who wanted to make a comment about Alan Moon. He wanted to recognize
not only Alan's games -- which the player enjoyed playing -- but also his
contributions to this newsgroup.
Why not simply start a new topic for these game designers? At the very least
why not word the message positively -- i.e. in a way that highlights the
contributions of the game designers without attempting to dictate what RGB
readers should or should not recognize. The same applies to those who have
privately run web pages such as The Game Cabinet.
In other words, why make your posts antagonistic?
Henry
spet...@my-dejanews.com
74glpq$fh9$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.co
m>, hvo...@metrois.com wrote:
[snip]
> Why not simply start a new topic for
> these game designers? At the
> very least why not word the
> message positively -- i.e. in a way
> that highlights the contributions of
> the game designers without
> attempting to dictate what RGB
> readers should or should not
> recognize. The same applies to
> those who have privately run web
> pages such as The Game Cabinet.
>
> In other words, why make your
> posts antagonistic?
As I summarized in my orignial post...
"Prominent web-zines posting to
rec.games.board would do well to
recognize the achievements of
popular board game inventors."
What's "antagonistic" about that?
Scott Peterson
Mendocino Game Company
hvo...@metrois.com
Other than attempting to dictate what privately run web pages/zines should
do? Nothing. I'm sure you would also enjoy people posting messages telling
you what your company "would do well" to publish. But why don't we take a
look at the opening statement of your original post? Here it is:
"Alan Moon's board game inventions
are much revered by core game
enthusiasts, but they are eclipsed by
the popular board games of lesser
known inventors."
What's not antagonistic about that? This whole thread was begun because a fan
of Alan Moon's games wanted to specifically recognize Alan's contributions.
Your opening statement essentially trivilizes Alan Moon's games while touting
other game designers as superior simply because their games have sold lots of
copies. THAT is antagonistic.
Your preoccupation with the sales and marketing of games -- while
understandable considering what you do -- seems to blind you to any other
aspect of gaming. This thread has been yet another example of that attitude.
While others have described the enjoyment they have received while PLAYING
Alan Moon's games you jump in, casually dismiss Alan, then tout game
designers based solely on sales. Sales figures tell me nothing useful about a
game other than that a bunch of people bought the game. There is nothing
associated with game play, the thing I consider most important about a game,
that can be learned from the sales figures, the thing you obviously consider
most important about a game.
However, to use your own sales oriented judgement, you must readily agree that
Alan Moon is a vastly superior game designer than you are, right? After all,
Elfenland is bound to sell many times the number of copies of Pirateer sold to
date (and may already have sold more copies). Add in all the other games he's
designed and I'm sure we have a total sales figure much, much higher than
Pirateer's sales.
Henry
spet...@my-dejanews.com
3669E84C.E2DA60E3@mediaone.
net>, Bob Scherer-Hoock <
bobs...@mediaone.net> wrote:
> Chief among these (falsehoods) is
> the statement that Alan Moon's
> White Wind company went
> "belly up." [...snip]
Okay. White Wind stopped
publishing core games. What are
they doing now?
> White Wind was designed as a
> marketing device, not a get-rich
> scheme, and I would like to assert
> that it was highly successful in this
> respect. [...snip]
If this is true, then why didn't Alan's
current employer, FX Schmid USA,
publish a single one of his White
Wind games in their own starting line-
up?
> that Alan has a track record with a
> larger German publisher, other
> White Wind and previously
> unpublished designs will follow.
[...snip]
If "Spiel des Jahres" awards are so
prestigioius, then why aren't they
mentioned by name on the FX
Schmid USA web site?
> Third falsehood: And this is an
> implied one in other postings, that
> there is only one legitimate means
> of marketing a game and
> measuring its success, and that's
> the Pirateer model. This isn't even
> worth debating. [...snip]
If so, then why isn't Alan working for
Mayfair, publishing $35 core games?
My point is that Alan Moon and FX
Schmid aren't publishing core
games. Their packaging is a cut
above the core game norm, their
average price is $17 and they don't
carry the "White Wind" brand, they
say "FX Schmid." The 3P's (package,
price & publisher) all go bing-bing-
bing for 'popular games.'
> I am a (I hope a good) friend of Alan
> Moon's. I know he is reading this
> thread, but he is too polite to step
> into a discussion that was set up to
> be a pissing contest between
> designers. He does not know I'm
> posting this and may well prefer
> that I don't, but I couldn't let
> comments that are blatantly false
> go uncorrected.
The largest publisher of core games
(Avalon Hill) has sold out, and the
leading core game designer (Alan
Moon) has fled for the gold fields of
popular games.
Deal with it.
Scott Peterson
Mendocino Game Company
Geenius at Wrok
> "Prominent web-zines posting to
> rec.games.board would do well to
> recognize the achievements of
> popular board game inventors."
>
> What's "antagonistic" about that?
Nothing, if you think there'd be nothing antagonistic about telling Food &
Wine magazine that it would do well to recognize the achievements of Ray
Kroc. Making a hell of a lot of money off a crummy product may in fact be
a legitimate achievement, but it's not one that's likely to fit in with
the value system of those who appreciate quality.
--
"I wish EVERY day could be a shearing festival!" -- The 10 Commandments
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
Keith Ammann is gee...@albany.net "I notice you have a cloud of doom.
Live with honor, endure with grace I must admit it makes you seem
www.albany.net/~geenius * Lun Yu 2:24 dangerous and sexy."
Glenn Kuntz
> > What's "antagonistic" about that?
>
> Nothing, if you think there'd be nothing antagonistic about telling Food &
> Wine magazine that it would do well to recognize the achievements of Ray
> Kroc.
Ok, I don't have any problem with this statement.
> Making a hell of a lot of money off a crummy product may in fact be
> a legitimate achievement, but it's not one that's likely to fit in with
> the value system of those who appreciate quality.
However this sounds like a case of P/K/B.There is a significant portion of the
population at large that *likes* McFood, and there are similarly many people
who *like* the ilk of games by Hasbro, et al.My, we *are* getting to be a
bunch of snobs! :-)
Glenn (Who likes games from *both* worlds. ;-)
spet...@my-dejanews.com
74hiej$af9$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.co
m>, hvo...@metrois.com wrote:
> Other than attempting to dictate
> what privately run web pages/zines
> should do? Nothing. I'm sure you
> would also enjoy people posting
> messages telling you what your
> company "would do well" to
> publish. [...snip]
If I promoted my web site as an
information resource, I would expect
suggestions and contributions from
readers.
> But why don't we take a look at the
> opening statement of your original
> post? Here it is:
>
> "Alan Moon's board game
> inventions are much revered by
> core game enthusiasts, but they
> are eclipsed by the popular board
>games of lesser known inventors."
>
> What's not antagonistic about that?
> This whole thread was begun
> because a fan of Alan Moon's
> games wanted to specifically
> recognize Alan's contributions.
> Your opening statement
> essentially trivilizes Alan Moon's
> games while touting other game
> designers as superior simply
> because their games have sold lots
> of copies. THAT is antagonistic.
> [...snip]
If the article had been posted on a
newsgroup with a name like
alt.worship.alanmoon, you might
have a point, but it wasn't. I used
sales figures to back my point that
there are other game inventors
whose games have "eclipsed" those
of Alan Moon.
> Your preoccupation with the sales
> and marketing of games -- while
> understandable considering what
> you do -- seems to blind you to any
> other aspect of gaming. [...snip]
Sales is an objective measure of the
popularity of any product, including
games. Marketing is another
objective measure to define the
segment of population which the
product best suits. I used them to
establish (a) the relative size of
popular and core game markets, and
(b) the difference between those
who play popular and core games.
> However, to use your own sales
> oriented judgement, you must
> readily agree that Alan Moon is a
> vastly superior game designer than
> you are, right? After all, Elfenland
> is bound to sell many times the
> number of copies of Pirateer sold
> to date (and may already have sold
> more copies). Add in all the other
> games he's designed and I'm sure
> we have a total sales figure much,
> much higher than Pirateer's sales.
If you combined Alan Moon's
individual game sales, they wouldn't
compare to those of inventors
Moriarty, Sterten or Walsh. And if you
averaged them, the results would
not be very flattering to Mr. Moon at
all.
My own game, Pirateer has sold over
50,000 copies. What percentage of
Alan Moon's games have done that?
Benjamin Foy
> In article <
> 3669E84C.E2DA60E3@mediaone.
> net>, Bob Scherer-Hoock <
> bobs...@mediaone.net> wrote:
>
> > Chief among these (falsehoods) is
> > the statement that Alan Moon's
> > White Wind company went
> > "belly up." [...snip]
>
> Okay. White Wind stopped
> publishing core games. What are
> they doing now?
1). Most of White Wind games are numbered, limited edition sets.
2). There were a couple cheap card games which were not limited edition.
3). When Alan stopped producing WW limited edition games, I doubt it made
sense to continue producing the card games.
4). Freight Train is now being published by Mayfair in the US.
5). Elfenlands (a version of Elfenroads) is being published in Germany and
won the most prestigious award which a game can be awarded.
6). Alan is mainly a game designer, not really a game publisher.
> If this is true, then why didn't Alan's
> current employer, FX Schmid USA,
> publish a single one of his White
> Wind games in their own starting line-
> up?
They probably will, eventually...
> If "Spiel des Jahres" awards are so
> prestigioius, then why aren't they
> mentioned by name on the FX
> Schmid USA web site?
Ask their web designer. Certainly if you asked any European what the most
prestigious game award is, they will answer "Spiel des Jahres". Ask any
American what the most famous game award is and they will give you a blank
look.
> > Third falsehood: And this is an
> > implied one in other postings, that
> > there is only one legitimate means
> > of marketing a game and
> > measuring its success, and that's
> > the Pirateer model. This isn't even
> > worth debating. [...snip]
>
> If so, then why isn't Alan working for
> Mayfair, publishing $35 core games?
Mayfair is publishing one of Alan's games. Mayfair isn't the only decent
company around either.
> My point is that Alan Moon and FX
> Schmid aren't publishing core
> games. Their packaging is a cut
> above the core game norm, their
> average price is $17 and they don't
> carry the "White Wind" brand, they
> say "FX Schmid." The 3P's (package,
> price & publisher) all go bing-bing-
> bing for 'popular games.'
Lets face it, like many hobbies there are two types of people who play
boardgames. Those who play occasionally and those who play regularly.
The people who play occasionally greatly outnumber the people who play
regularly. The people who play boardgames regularly have different
standards than those who play occasionally. You claim these standards
have to be be the same, we disagree.
> > I am a (I hope a good) friend of Alan
> > Moon's. I know he is reading this
> > thread, but he is too polite to step
> > into a discussion that was set up to
> > be a pissing contest between
> > designers. He does not know I'm
> > posting this and may well prefer
> > that I don't, but I couldn't let
> > comments that are blatantly false
> > go uncorrected.
I think I get on Alan's nerves.
> The largest publisher of core games
> (Avalon Hill) has sold out, and the
> leading core game designer (Alan
> Moon) has fled for the gold fields of
> popular games.
>
> Deal with it.
Alan has always designed "popular" games. Gamers just like them also.
- Ben
---------------------------------------------------------------------
"Cold hearted orb that rules the night,
Removes the colours from our sight.
Red is grey and yellow white,
But we decide which one is right.
And which is an illusion???."
from Nights in White Satin by The Moody Blues 1967
Kevin J. Maroney
>Okay. White Wind stopped
>publishing core games. What are
>they doing now?
Selling over 200,000 copies of _Elfenland_ in less than a year. How's
by you?
>If this is true, then why didn't Alan's
>current employer, FX Schmid USA,
>publish a single one of his White
>Wind games in their own starting line-
>up?
My assumption is that Alan was not allowed to publish his own games
with someone else's money. That could be incorrect, but unless you
know otherwise and can demonstrate it, I think you might wish to fall
silent on this matter.
>If so, then why isn't Alan working for
>Mayfair, publishing $35 core games?
Because he's working for a much bigger company with much better
distribution? Duh?
>The 3P's (package,
>price & publisher) all go bing-bing-
>bing for 'popular games.'
If you can see a qualitative distinction between _Call My Bluff_ and
_Take It Easy_ (which you've just labelled "popular games") and
_Settlers_ and _Elfenland_ (which you've just dismissed as "core
games"), you have sharper eyes than I.
>The largest publisher of core games
>(Avalon Hill) has sold out, and the
>leading core game designer (Alan
>Moon) has fled for the gold fields of
>popular games.
That would explain the forthcoming _Union Pacific_, the continued
publication of _Freight Train_, and so many other things about Alan's
life so well and perceptively. Thank you for shedding your deep inner
light onto we ignoramuses who chose to actually learn about the things
of which we speak.
Roger Wink
my ire.
Let me get my initial comment (as inappropriate as it is) off my chest
first...my God, Scott, you are a pompous ass.
Now that I'm past that, let me make a couple of comments.
> I used
> sales figures to back my point that
> there are other game inventors
> whose games have "eclipsed" those
> of Alan Moon.
Sales figures do not constitute quality in any way shape or form...if they
did Metallica and the Beastie Boys would win every major music award and
Judith Krantz would be given the top literary awards. When we compliment
Alan and other great designers, we are discussing the quality of his
designs, the challenges that they afford to our minds and the enjoyment
that we get from them. We ADMIRE his work for what it is...a superbly
designed game and while I play all types of games, including those designed
by members of your list, I don't have the same admiration for a game such
as Balderdash or Outburst, I do not get the same feeling that I do when I
play a game like Airlines or Euphrat & Tigris
Aaron Fuegi's Internet Game List is still in it's infancy, but is starting
to show the admiration people have and the popularity among true gamers
(i.e., those that would take the time to go over a list of 1000+ games and
rate all those they have played) of those games you would consider to be
unsuccessful as their sales are not in the realm of those carried by a
major retailer. 787 games have been voted on by 40+ people with very
interesting results:
Settlers of Catan - 7.96 rating and played/voted on by 80% of those who
voted.
Euphrat & Tigris - 8.85 rating (I think the highest in the list) and
played/voted on by 50%
Robo Rally - 6.58 rating and played/voted on by 67%
These are games that are admired by those that play and are played by a
good number of people (Euphrat & Tigris' % will go higher once it has been
out a little longer.
Now let's look at some of the big sellers:
Risk - 4.93 average rating and played/voted on by 63%
Monopoly - 4.06 rating and played/voted on by 76%
Uno - 4.53 rating and played/voted on by 39%
Pirateer - 3.40 rating and played/voted on by 11% (sorry...I know this is a
low blow but I've seen more then enough of those from your posts)
My interpretation...they may sell a lot and be a success to a Harvard MBA,
but they do not get a lot of respect in the world for which the Moon's and
Knizia's design.
> If you combined Alan Moon's
> individual game sales, they wouldn't
> compare to those of inventors
> Moriarty, Sterten or Walsh. And if you
> averaged them, the results would
> not be very flattering to Mr. Moon at
> all.
> My own game, Pirateer has sold over
> 50,000 copies. What percentage of
> Alan Moon's games have done that?
I'm not sure Mr. Moon cares. My understanding is that Alan is a true gamer
and, amazingly to some people, the admiration of his fellow gamers may just
mean as much or more then making a financial killing with any one of his
titles.
Roger
Bob Scherer-Hoock
spet...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> In article <
> 3669E84C.E2DA60E3@mediaone.
> net>, Bob Scherer-Hoock <
> bobs...@mediaone.net> wrote:
>
> > Chief among these (falsehoods) is
> > the statement that Alan Moon's
> > White Wind company went
> > "belly up." [...snip]
>
> Okay. White Wind stopped
> publishing core games. What are
> they doing now?
Licensing game designs. I thought I said that.
> > White Wind was designed as a
> > marketing device, not a get-rich
> > scheme, and I would like to assert
> > that it was highly successful in this
> > respect. [...snip]
>
> If this is true, then why didn't Alan's
> current employer, FX Schmid USA,
> publish a single one of his White
> Wind games in their own starting line-
> up?
>
Let's put this quote you've taken from my post back into context. I said,
"The purpose (of White Wind) was for Alan to expose his designs to the
German market, begin to make a name for himself there, and hopefully have
either a White Wind game or some other design picked up by a major German
game publisher once he did have a reputation there." I then asserted, as
you quoted above, that White Wind was highly successful in this respect.
The fact that Elfenland was picked up by a larger publisher, has sold in
the range of 200,000 copies this year, and that 10 more Moon designs (give
or take a couple either way) will be published in 1999, with more on the
drawing boards for 2000 and beyond, speaks to me of success. But I'm just
restating what I said previously (except for the 200,000 figure, which I
have heard since my original post) for the benefit of those who didn't see
it or weren't paying attention. I think these facts speak to success.
Others may look at the same evidence and draw different conclusions I
suppose. (I mean, there are still people who believe the Earth is flat.)
As for FX Schmid USA, it really has nothing to do with my assertion of
White Wind success because it is an American company (that's why USA is in
the title).. White Wind's designs were an effort to break into the German
market, but I'm repeating myself yet again for the benefit of those who
missed or weren't paying attention to the original post. The phrasing of
the FX Schmid USA question, in a manner that seems typically derogatory,
makes it sound as if Alan couldn't get his own bosses to publish his
games. The ironic thing is that Alan is the boss who decides what FX
Schmid USA will publish. I don't know that he ever considered publishing
any of his own games. Frankly I doubt it, as, although he could have if he
wanted to, he's been very careful to keep his job in product development at
FX Schmid USA separate from his vocation as a freelance game designer. I do
know he didn't agree to take the job with FX Schmid USA until he was
contractually free to license his designs to whomever he chose, not wanting
his designs to be owned by the company he worked for or anyone else other
than himself. And (and again I'm repeating myself for anyone who isn't
paying attention) he's licensed 10 designs (plus or minus a couple either
way) for publication in 1999 and more for the next couple of years beyond.
>
> > that Alan has a track record with a
> > larger German publisher, other
> > White Wind and previously
> > unpublished designs will follow.
> [...snip]
>
> If "Spiel des Jahres" awards are so
> prestigioius, then why aren't they
> mentioned by name on the FX
> Schmid USA web site?
>
You would have to ask the marketing person who put the FX Schmid USA web
site together. I think the answer is obvious, but in case others don't see
it that way, I'll state what I believe to be the obvious: Relatively few
people in the USA (and remember, FX Schmid USA is an American company
selling English-language games to Americans) know what Spiel des Jahres
means. Even if translated, without knowing how or by whom the award is
determined, I doubt it would carry anywhere near the credibility in the USA
that it has in Germany among a mass audience. I notice the FX Schmid USA
web site refers to "Award winning game in Europe," so obviously a marketing
person has determined that this phrasing is the most credibility that can
be brought to a USA product. I do agree with you, though, they're probably
selling the award short. They could probably make something more of it.
> > Third falsehood: And this is an
> > implied one in other postings, that
> > there is only one legitimate means
> > of marketing a game and
> > measuring its success, and that's
> > the Pirateer model. This isn't even
> > worth debating. [...snip]
>
> If so, then why isn't Alan working for
> Mayfair, publishing $35 core games?
See comments about FX Schmid USA above. Why should any one company own his
games when many are willing to publish them?
>
> My point is that Alan Moon and FX
> Schmid aren't publishing core
> games.
No one ever said otherwise. I didn't see FX Schmid USA enter the discussion
until your post to which I am responding.
> Their packaging is a cut
> above the core game norm, their
> average price is $17 and they don't
> carry the "White Wind" brand, they
> say "FX Schmid." The 3P's (package,
> price & publisher) all go bing-bing-
> bing for 'popular games.'
>
> The largest publisher of core games
> (Avalon Hill) has sold out, and the
> leading core game designer (Alan
> Moon) has fled for the gold fields of
> popular games.
>
Now I really feel sorry for Alan. First he's criticized because his "White
Wind company went belly up" and portrayed as a failure. Now he's criticized
because he's "fled for the gold fields." Poor guy can't cut a break whether
he's bankrupt or rolling in gold. He hasn't fled anywhere. He got a job.
I've got a job. You've got a job. His game designs have nothing more to do
with his FX Schmid USA job than they do with my job or your job. Outside of
the office he's a freelance game designer and his designs are being
published by any number of companies, just as they have for the last 10
years. The only change is more of them are now being published as a result
of the reputation developed through White Wind and the notoriety of
Elfenland.
>
> Deal with it.
>
I am dealing with it. Very well, thank you. Now deal with this: Your
original post asserted that, "Alan Moon's board game inventions are much
revered by core game enthusiasts, but they are eclipsed by the popular
board games of lesser known inventors." In subsequent posts it became clear
that you meant eclipsed in terms of sales. I have no doubt you are correct,
as I have great reason to doubt that Alan Moon is the top-selling game
designer of all time and I have every reason to think there are lesser
known inventors selling more games, as the Parker Bros. and Milton Bradley
labels far outsell any other brand and I've rarely seen a designer's name
on any of their boxes.
You went on to mention a Bruce Sterten (Taboo, 25 Words or Less and Rapid
Recall), a Jay Moriarty (221B Baker Street - what a great name for a
Sherlock Holmes game designer), and a Tim Walsh (Tri-Bond and Blurt). I've
never heard of Tri-Bond or Blurt, so I'll omit reference to Mr. Walsh. I've
played 221B Baker Street with my family over the course of more than 20
years. I think it's an excellent game of its genre. But I had no clue who
invented it; it's not on the box anywhere. Likewise Taboo is my favorite
party game (ironically I was introduced to Taboo by a Mr. Alan Moon), but I
didn't know who invented it; there's no name on the box. Had I known Bruce
Sterten invented it, I might have given 25 Words or Less a try much more
quickly (I eventually did try it based on the Games Magazine award;
normally this award doesn't mean much to me as over time their tastes have
tended not to correspond with mine). I think the designer of a game is
important information because once you find someone creating games that you
like, you tend to stick with them knowing that it's more probable that some
new creation of theirs will also be something you like. But as you well
know, this hasn't been done in the USA, especially by the large companies.
I think that's a shame. As has already been said, the main reason no one in
r.g.b., or the Game Cabinet, or Luding, etc., ever, ever mentions the
designers you champion is because they're virtually anonymous. I repeat:
That's a shame. I appreciate you bringing this to my attention; I just wish
it hadn't been done at someone else's expense.
One of your other posts questioned how Alan's game sales compared to the
three names you mention, and that "if you averaged them, the results would
not be very flattering to Mr. Moon at all." Possibly true, but I suspect
that if you included all these designers' games in the equation (assuming
they have others that weren't hits on the scale of Taboo or as time-honored
as 221B Baker Street) and that if a substantial number of their games were
self-published limited editions, I suspect the averages would be pretty
close. And whatever you include in the equation, the bottom line is: So
what. They're successful (just anonymous in the USA), and Alan Moon is
successful (and very well known in Germany, not nearly so well-known in the
USA, except among people here who play German games).
While we're averaging game sales, you also stated, "My own game, Pirateer
has sold over 50,000 copies. What percentage of Alan Moon's games have done
that?" Well, any baseball player will tell you the more times you go to
bat, the less chance you have of batting 1.000 (especially if the hit
needed to reach base is defined as selling 50,000 copies of a game and at
least 7 of your "at-bats" are limited editions of 1,200). But I believe he
has several more than one hit, though.
But back to averages. According the Pirateer web site, this is the 20th
anniversary of the game. 50,000 copies sold over 20 years averages out to
2,500 sold per year. At that rate Pirateer will match Elfenland's sales for
this year alone in the year 2,058. Aren't number games wonderful?
Aristophanes
> In article <
> 366c6943...@client.ne.ne
> ws.psi.net>,
> kmar...@crossover.com wrote:
>
> > Selling over 200,000 copies of
> > _Elfenland_ in less than a year.
> > How's by you?
>
> White Wind doesn't publish
> "Elfenland," nor do they license it, to
> the best of my knowledge. Also,
> your estimate of 200,000 copies
> seems a bit high.
>
> > Because he's working for a much
> > bigger company with much better
> > distribution? Duh?
>
> ...and producing popular games with
> a much broader market than the core
> games he once published.
What are "core" games? Is this a word you've coined to justify your
argument or is it a commonly accepted word in the industry glossary, a
standard, objective. Careful. You already said sales figures were de fato
objective measurements of a game as well.
> > If you can see a qualitative
> > distinction between _Call My Bluff_
> > and _Take It Easy_ (which you've
> > just labelled "popular games") and
> > _Settlers_ and _Elfenland_ (which
> > you've just dismissed as "core
> > games"), you have sharper eyes
> > than I.
>
> Okay. Let's start with "Take it Easy"
> vs "Settlers."
>
> "Take it Easy"
> Package: Professional cover artwork,
> medium size game pieces, appears
> simple & understandable.
> Price: $24
> Play Length: 10 minutes for ages 10
> and up.
> Publisher: FX Schmid USA
>
> "Settlers of Catan"
> Package: Semi-professional cover
> artwork, many small game pieces,
> appears complex.
> Price: $35
> Play Length: 1 to 2 hours for ages 12
> and up.
> Publisher: Mayfair
>
> It doesn't take very sharp eyes to see
> a big difference between these two
> types of games. "Duh?"
Let's add another game, shall we?
"Advanced Dungeons and Dragons"
Package: Varies by year of publication, hack to highly professional,
thousands of pages of rules, constantly appended and updated, revised
publications necessitate complete replacement with new versions, very
complex game.
Price: $30 (single player only) to $400 (Dungeon Master or gaming group total)
Play Lenght: 2-5 hours (or more) in a single setting, campaigns spread over
many weeks, months, or even years of time. Ages 8 and up.
Publisher: TSR/Wizards of the Coast.
Demographically D&D smacked right into the same markets as both games
mentioned above, was a complex "core" game which became a massively popular
phenomenon, evolved into an incredibly complex game system, and spawned one
of the most robust and inventive fields of gaming ever. It was (is) played
by millions of people around the world in a number of languages and appears
to cross social boundaries in terms of sales and educational level.
Your blind insistence on the existence of a category called a "core" game
is nearsighted. The design of a game by itself cannot make it "core"
because even a complex game like D&D can earn sales figures which put it
into the stratosphere beyond which even your quite pedestrian game
Pirateers can only dream of achieving. Its market and brand recognition are
huge yet the product can only fit into your definition of what a "core"
game is.
Therefore, your distinction holds no weight. I hold that a game is made
popular more by its marketing, but that it becomes classic by design (or
simple replayability). Classic meaning being reprinted a lot.
Designers like Moon and the buyoyt of AH by Hasbro might actually mean that
some sharp MBA's in the gaming world are catching on to the necessity of
deep, thoughtful game design over simple repetitive games centred on the
mainly American "family" board game theme of roll-the-dice-and-move. There
was hint of this to come when MB brought out Axis & Allies and Shogun etc.
in an attempt to meld the wargaming crowd with a younger generation who
wanted more dynamism and shorter playing times. Now the industry overall
might be taking its clues from the German market and designers. Certainly
the demographics support a renaissance in board games. And you cannot sell
adults the same sinmple games they played as kids. They'll move from
Masterpiece to Modern Art in the same way Americans now really do drink afr
more premium brand coffee than they do Folgers.
spet...@my-dejanews.com
Pine.GSO.3.96.981207160914.22
028B-100000@merlin>, Geenius at
Wrok > gee...@albany.net> wrote:
> Nothing, if you think there'd be
> nothing antagonistic about telling
> Food & Wine magazine that it
> would do well to recognize the
> achievements of Ray Kroc. Making
> a hell of a lot of money off a crummy
> product may in fact be a legitimate
> achievement, but it's not one that's
> likely to fit in with the value system
> of those who appreciate quality.
Before you attempt to position core
games in a 'connoisseur' category,
you're going to have to consider one
very important factor; snob appeal.
Cigars, perfume, wine, automobiles,
clothing ...no problem. But GenCon?
Probably not ;>)
spet...@my-dejanews.com
> My point is that Alan Moon and FX
> Schmid aren't publishing core
> games. Their packaging is a cut
> above the core game norm, their
> average price is $17 and they don't
> carry the "White Wind" brand, they
> say "FX Schmid." The 3P's
> (package, price & publisher) all go
> bing-bing-bing for 'popular games.'
I forgot about another P; playing
time. FX Schmid USA's games
average 17 minutes apiece.
Make that bing-bing-bing-BING.
Scott Peterson
Mendocino Game Company
Kevin J. Maroney
>Avalon Hill isn't "temporarily on hold,"
>they're dead. Over 250 core game
>titles have been scrapped by Hasbro
>for less than a dozen to be
>repackaged and sold in the mass
>market.
By the way, this directly contradicts information I have from people
who actually work for Hasbro. Trust Scrot Peterson approximately as
far as you can throw him.
spet...@my-dejanews.com
Pine.SUN.3.96.981207172337.21
935C-...@access2.digex.net
Benjamin Foy
bf...@access2.digex.net> wrote:
> Certainly if you asked any
> European what the most
> prestigious game award is, they will
> answer "Spiel des Jahres". Ask
> any American what the most
> famous game award is and they will
> give you a blank look.
Really? I think the fact that Sterten's
"Taboo" got passed over for the SdJ
award in 1992, then went on to
become Germany's best seller in
1996 over "Settlers" tends to
contradict your statement about SdJ
name recognition in Europe. In the
American toy retailing community,
where most games are sold, Parent's
Choice, Oppenheimer and Mensa
awards are widely known and
respected ("Taboo" won the Mensa
award). Spiel des Jahres has
practically no recognition among toy
retailers here.
> Lets face it, like many hobbies
> there are two types of people who
> play boardgames. Those who play
> occasionally and those who play
> regularly. The people who play
> occasionally greatly outnumber the
> people who play regularly. The
> people who play boardgames
> regularly have different standards
> than those who play occasionally.
> You claim these standards have to
> be be the same, we disagree.
I agree about your description of two
types of boardgame players. I also
agree that their standards are
different, which defines their
products as two unique subsets of
the boardgame category.
> Alan has always designed
> "popular" games. Gamers just like
> them also.
Which Alan Moon game design fits
the 4P's of 'popular game' definition
(package, price, publisher & play
length)?
Scott Peterson
Mendocino Game Company
spet...@my-dejanews.com
> Selling over 200,000 copies of
> _Elfenland_ in less than a year.
> How's by you?
White Wind doesn't publish
"Elfenland," nor do they license it, to
the best of my knowledge. Also,
your estimate of 200,000 copies
seems a bit high.
> Because he's working for a much
> bigger company with much better
> distribution? Duh?
...and producing popular games with
a much broader market than the core
games he once published.
> If you can see a qualitative
> distinction between _Call My Bluff_
> and _Take It Easy_ (which you've
> just labelled "popular games") and
> _Settlers_ and _Elfenland_ (which
> you've just dismissed as "core
> games"), you have sharper eyes
> than I.
Okay. Let's start with "Take it Easy"
vs "Settlers."
"Take it Easy"
Package: Professional cover artwork,
medium size game pieces, appears
simple & understandable.
Price: $24
Play Length: 10 minutes for ages 10
and up.
Publisher: FX Schmid USA
"Settlers of Cataan"
Package: Semi-professional cover
artwork, many small game pieces,
appears complex.
Price: $35
Play Length: 1 to 2 hours for ages 12
and up.
Publisher: Mayfair
It doesn't take very sharp eyes to see
a big difference between these two
types of games. "Duh?"
Scott Peterson
Mendocino Game Company
JamesAB5
>
>spet...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
[snip]
Bob,
Thank you. Alan Moon isn't the only man of eloquence around these parts. :-)
Best,
Jim Bailey (jame...@aol.com)
http://www.sff.net/people/jbailey/
Web Assistant: The Market List -- http://www.marketlist.com/
SF/F/H short-story market listings and more.
hvo...@metrois.com
spet...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> In article <<snip>
> > Your preoccupation with the sales
> > and marketing of games -- while
> > understandable considering what
> > you do -- seems to blind you to any
> > other aspect of gaming. [...snip]
>
> Sales is an objective measure of the
> popularity of any product, including
> games. Marketing is another
> objective measure to define the
> segment of population which the
> product best suits. I used them to
> establish (a) the relative size of
> popular and core game markets, and
> (b) the difference between those
> who play popular and core games.
There are those who read this newsgroup who are of the opinion that "core
gamers" make up a significant segment of the gaming populous. I tend to
disagree with that opinion (i.e. I agree with you on this point, Scott).
However, regardless of how big or small the core gamer market is, we really
aren't here to discuss games in an objective manner.
Let me use the following question as an example:
"I'm thinking of buying Samurai by Knizia. Could someone tell me about the
game?"
An answer of "Samurai has sold X copies since its release" would be a useless
answer to me. It's an OBJECTIVE answer, I'll grant you. But it still
doesn't tell me a thing about the game. I want a SUBJECTIVE answer such as
"I liked it because..." or "I don't like it because..." Sales figures will
not help me decide whether I would enjoy the game. Opinions accompanied by
the reasoning behind the opinions will.
You seem to find it offensive that RGBers don't recognize top selling games
and the designers of those games. As others have stated, any "core" group
will have different tastes than the mainstream. Would you go into a
newsgroup dedicated to beer and proclaim that Busch is one of the best beers
in the world simply because more people buy Busch than buy most other beers?
Would you argue that the best hamburger known to man is made at MacDonald's
simply because they sell more hamburgers than anyone else? Would you argue
that Red Lobster serves the best seafood simply because they sell more than
seafood than most other restaurants? I doubt seriously that you would do any
of those (and if you did you would receive about the same reception you've
received in RGB). Yet, for some reason, you seem to think that "core" gamers
must recognize games simply because they are popular.
Good games do not always sell well. Games that sell well are not always good.
Henry
Mark Jackson
Thank you for lucidly and logically defending the smearing of Alan
Moon's name and reputation.
To Scott:
Coming from anyone else, your assertions regarding White Wind, Alan
Moon, and the state of "core" vs. "popular" games would have caused some
argument and discussion. Coming from you as a game designer/publisher,
coupled with your history for inflammatory and off-topic posts, you end
up with the response you so richly deserve.
As I told you before, Pirateer is permanently shelved in my game
collection. Although I believe the game is a good filler game, I refuse
to support someone who shows this little respect for a fellow game
designer and the community they both design for...
"We are men of action. Lies do not become us."
THE PRINCESS BRIDE
Mark Jackson
Nashville, TN
Geenius at Wrok
> They'll move from
> Masterpiece to Modern Art in the same way Americans now really do drink afr
> more premium brand coffee than they do Folgers.
Actually, they don't. But I liked the rest of your points.
spet...@my-dejanews.com
74j8rd$o4q$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.co
m>, hvo...@metrois.com wrote:
> However, regardless of how big or
> small the core gamer market is, we
> really aren't here to discuss games
> in an objective manner.
I am.
Scott Peterson
Mendocino Game Comany
http://www.pirateer.com
hvo...@metrois.com
spet...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> All of these inventors have produced
> successful board games which have
> gone "gold," selling over one million
> copies. None of them have yet been
> recognized by core game resources
> like "The Game Cabinet," "The Game
> Report," or "Luding."
You might want to do your homework before making claims such as this. The
Game Report has reviews -- positive ones, I might add -- for both Taboo and
25 Words or Less (links to both of these can be found at Luding). Note,
also, that Luding is a site providing links to existing game reviews. To the
best of my knowledge the owners do not actually post game reviews. Even
given that, they have a listing for Tri-Bond and perhaps Blurt. As there are
no available reviews on-line, there aren't any links to follow. If you know
of any existing reviews on-line, I'm sure the folks at Luding would love to
hear about them.
As a matter of fact, since you feel so strongly about this, why haven't you
started a "hobby" web site for board games? Since you seem to think it fair
to claim The Game Cabinet, The Game Report, and Luding -- all hobbiest web
pages done in the spare time of their owners -- should be covering these
games, surely it's fair for us to claim that you, their champion, should use
your spare time to provide web coverage for these games.
And if you can't be bothered to do this, why should anyone else in this
newsgroup?
Henry
Tim Moore
have had 1 interaction with, but it was pleasant (BTW, Alan, I'll still
trade my sister for an Elfenroads ;-) ) But to be honest, I have never
played any of his games. Scott is also right. . .I have bought games
because of their packaging and availability thereby helping sales and
popularity of a game (Most notably. . .I bought Robo Rally and asked, " Who
the hell is Richard Garfield, and why does he warrant a mention on the
customer service card?"
I think we can all take a lesson from music on this issue. You may be a
better guitar player than the one playing, but that person is the one on
stage. Appreciate him for his time, and his art. When he is done, you can
get up on stage and show what you've got. Yes, some people will like you
better than the first, but others will like the first. I will buy an Alan
Moon game (someday) and I will enjoy it. . .I will also probably buy a
Scott Peterson game and enjoy it. ..
The discussion has been moving into the realm of Quatity vs Quality which
many of us know is a difficult process. Yes, you need to make enough money
on each unit to live, but you also need to have the quality (both
components and mechanics) to encourage play. It is easy to define success
by units sold, but quality also adds so much. . .There is after all only
one Mona Lisa, but it has been enjoyed for hundreds of years. Does it
matter wether she is one who was admired by Leondardo da Vinci or it it is
him in drag? NO. It's about the technique, and the color, and the
expression. HOWEVER, if there was not an economic appreciation for his art
when he was alive, we may never have had any of his most famous work. Both
are needed.
Scott, you are successful in what you do, and I appreciate your effort. I
don't believe you meant to rip into anyone about their game designs, or
their success, but you have admitedly stated that you don't always say
things in the most subtle ways. . .(In fact, I seen you proudly flaunt your
self-grandizement (sp?))
So I'll say it one more time: Enjoy who is on stage, cherish what the
performer has to say, take from it what you will, and then move on. . .your
turn is not far a way.
tim
ps. get the cards, I'm in the mood for a game of Hearts. . .
Kevin J. Maroney
>My own game, Pirateer has sold over
>50,000 copies. What percentage of
>Alan Moon's games have done that?
You have one game which has sold over 50,000 copies. Alan Moon has one
game which has sold over 200,000 copies. I think you lose on the
'battle of the tape measure' here.
I don't think any of Alan's other games have sold over 50,000 copies,
although I'd wouldn't be surprised to learn that _Airlines_ had.
However, it's hard to sell 50,000 copies of a 1200-copy limited
editon.
Kevin J. Maroney
>White Wind doesn't publish
>"Elfenland," nor do they license it, to
>the best of my knowledge. Also,
>your estimate of 200,000 copies
>seems a bit high.
A. Your knowledge is incorrect; Alan licensed it to Amigo through
White Wind, Inc.
B. Sales figures are taken from a statement from Alan. You are welcome
to call him a liar.
>Okay. Let's start with "Take it Easy"
>vs "Settlers."
>
>"Take it Easy"
>Package: Professional cover artwork,
>medium size game pieces, appears
>simple & understandable.
>Price: $24
>Play Length: 10 minutes for ages 10
>and up.
>Publisher: FX Schmid USA
>
>"Settlers of Cataan"
>Package: Semi-professional cover
>artwork, many small game pieces,
>appears complex.
>Price: $35
>Play Length: 1 to 2 hours for ages 12
>and up.
>Publisher: Mayfair
^^^^^^^
I'm sorry, you seem to have misspelled "Kosmos". Your ignorance is
forgivable; after all, you're only an ugly American.
>
>It doesn't take very sharp eyes to see
>a big difference between these two
>types of games. "Duh?"
And which one has sold 2.8 million units? In other words, which one is
"popular"? Duh?