Do You Like Books about Games?

[Patrick]

Just wondering. Some people say they hate strategy guides and such;
for them it spoils the fun of figuring out a game for themselves.

I've always enjoyed reading about games, whether it's game history,
advice on optimizing play, or whatever.

Books on chess strategy & tactics certainly don't spoil the challenge
of the game for me. I've read a stack of them and done all the
exercises, and I still blunder as badly as anyone.

Lately I've taken an interest in cribbage, and I just got a couple
books on that game in the mail yesterday. I breezed through the
introduction of one, refreshing myself on the history of the game and
learning that the older five-card version is still popular in pubs and
such. I like learning facts like those about a game; it makes me feel
I'm into something time-honored and widely popular. Reading a book
like that connects me with the world of cribbage. In years past, I
subscribed to magazines like "Chess Life" and "Go World" for the same
reason. Even if I couldn't always follow the professional games or
strategy articles, I liked feeling I was part of something big.

One kind of game book I'm not so keen on is the so-called strategy
guide for computer and console games. Often they contain puzzle
solutions and even "cheats." That sort of thing does kinda spoil a
game. Then again, when a game consists of nothing but a string of
puzzles, I don't consider it much of a game at all anyway; and it's
frustrating to get stuck for a long time on a puzzle--so I do like
having the solution available in case I finally give up.

Some books on games seem indispensable. A Hoyle-like book for card
games, for example. One of the great things about a deck of cards is
that you can play many different games with it--enough to keep you
happily busy for a lifetime. But you can't play any of them if you
don't know the rules. So, without a book, people are stuck with the
games they or others in their circle happen to know already. And as
likely as not, they're playing some nonstandard version of the game
(which is OK, until someone new joins the group or people from the
group go play elsewhere). Also, if enough time passes between games,
some of the rules may be forgotten.

[John McLeod]

You won't be surprised to learn that I have on my shelves around 300
books about card games. Some are anthologies, others are strategy guides
to particular games. For what I do, these are an indispensable source of
information. I also have a handful of books about various board games.

On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Patrick <p55ca...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Just wondering. Some people say they hate strategy guides and such;
>for them it spoils the fun of figuring out a game for themselves.

I enjoy figuring out the strategy for myself, but I also enjoy checking
how well I am doing by reading what others have to say, and by playing
against more experienced players when the opportunity arises.

The books I have seen about proprietary board games tend to be rather
superficial. In recent years, when I have wanted to read about the
strategy of such a game, I have normally turned to newsgroups such as
rec.games.board, or more recently to BoardGameGeek.
--
John McLeod For information on card games visit
jo...@pagat.com http://www.pagat.com/

[Peter Clinch]

Patrick wrote:
> Just wondering. Some people say they hate strategy guides and such;
> for them it spoils the fun of figuring out a game for themselves.

Not that, I just find them /incredibly/ dull.

> I've always enjoyed reading about games, whether it's game history,
> advice on optimizing play, or whatever.

History of games I find fascinating. David Parlett's Oxford History of
Baord Games is a good read, even if (I think necessarily) a bit light on
more recent developments (and docked a mark for calling Francis Tresham
Francis Gresham!). Bell's Board and Table Games from Many Civilizations
is a bit dry, but as a descriptive source of lots of games is worth having.

> like that connects me with the world of cribbage. In years past, I
> subscribed to magazines like "Chess Life" and "Go World" for the same
> reason. Even if I couldn't always follow the professional games or
> strategy articles, I liked feeling I was part of something big.

I get the British Go Association journal by default as I'm a member, but
again I find the analysis pretty dry and dull. I'm in the BGA more to
help get word out about Go than I use their services, admirable though
they are for the serious developing player. So that's not a criticism
of their journal, just a note that it's not really my sort of thing.

> Some books on games seem indispensable. A Hoyle-like book for card
> games, for example. One of the great things about a deck of cards is
> that you can play many different games with it--enough to keep you
> happily busy for a lifetime. But you can't play any of them if you
> don't know the rules. So, without a book, people are stuck with the
> games they or others in their circle happen to know already. And as
> likely as not, they're playing some nonstandard version of the game
> (which is OK, until someone new joins the group or people from the
> group go play elsewhere). Also, if enough time passes between games,
> some of the rules may be forgotten.

Agreed. Our friend Mr. Parlett to the rescue again for me.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.c...@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

[Sukunai]

Game books for me come in 3 forms.

The 'how to play a better game of' category much like what Patrick
mentioned, or in my case something by a man like James F Dunnigan and
his works on warfare.

The strategy guide sort, and I agree with Patrick, where's the fun in
playing a game, if you let a book ruin all the thrill of 'beating' the
game.

And actual rules books for a game.

Of course you can't remove the actual rules books, as you either learn
to play the game, or you don't.
And in some cases, some game books are more guidelines that iron clad
rules. Role playing games run off the notion that the person running
the game is the final say in what is or is not allowed in a game.
I find I like reading other's design notions on some established games
more notable would be the Dungeons and Dragons game.

And some books on some games can be helpful, as some games require a
lot of skill to play well, and why spend 10 years learning 10 years
worth of experience, when you can get a veteran to show you the ropes
expertly eh.
I don't have objections to game books that just teach how to play a
better game.

But I routinely have no problem telling a person that just beat
electronic game X thanks to a cheat guide, that they wasted the money
on the game, they wasted the money on the book, and they didn't beat
squat.

I've heard plenty of 'excuses' for doing it, but frankly, I just think
it's yet another example of how too many in gaming have gotten soft
lazy and under motivated.
In 1980 when I kicked your butt in a game of Squad leader or Third
Reich, it was because I was smarter than you.
It mattered to me, to know, that when I won a game, it was a measure
of my mental skills.

Sadly, today, too much gaming is conducted against machines, where
players can't even deal with being beaten by an artificial mind such
that they need to cheat.
When I win a game of Civilization IV while playing with a friend, I
call that a win. When I play it against just the AI and I win, well,
so what, I won against a dumb AI opponent. That's no win.

[Patrick]

On Apr 29, 8:56 am, John McLeod <j...@pagat.com> wrote:
> You won't be surprised to learn that I have on my shelves around 300

> books about card games. . . .

Maybe not surprised, but envious! That's a lot of books.

And I'll bet many of them are out of print, too--some for a very long
time. Relatively few books on games seem to stay in print decade
after decade.

Games are apparently popular enough that they get their own
(relatively small, usually) section in major bookstores. But the
choices there seem to be pretty limited (or maybe my knowledge about
games is just so extensive that the selection seems limited to me);
there's usually a big emphasis on chess and bridge (though the latter
is noticeably dwindling).

I was surprised, during the last few decades, to see Dungeons &
Dragons win a prominent place in major U.S. bookstores; it often gets
its own section.

The electronic-games section always looks terribly ephemeral to me.
Featured there are guidebooks on games that are on the verge of
obsolescence by the time the book hits the shelf. That strikes me as
odd, since I've always had a strong appreciation for games that seem
timeless. Apparently there's another kind of person who wants the
latest and shiniest game, even if he knows it'll be old news by
tomorrow.

[Patrick]

On Apr 29, 9:13 am, Sukunai <sukunai.ni.y...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> But I routinely have no problem telling a person that just beat
> electronic game X thanks to a cheat guide, that they wasted the money
> on the game, they wasted the money on the book, and they didn't beat
> squat.
>
> I've heard plenty of 'excuses' for doing it, but frankly, I just think
> it's yet another example of how too many in gaming have gotten soft

> lazy and under motivated. . . .

I don't think I've ever resorted to an out-and-out cheat; I don't see
the sense in that. But I have bought and used strategy guides once or
twice.

The last time was when I bought the DS game "Zelda: The Legend of Link/
The Phantom Hourglass." I had a pretty good idea what the game would
be like, as I'd read a bit about it. And from past experience, I knew
I'd reach points in the game that would frustrate me to tears.
Ostensibly an interactive story, the game is basically just a series
of puzzles strung together; and there's often a hidden tool or unusual
trick involved in solving a puzzle--and you have to solve the puzzle
before the story will continue. I knew I'd grow to hate the game as
soon as I ran into a puzzle I couldn't solve and got stuck there too
long. So, I bought the strategy guide--and I ended up referring to it
often as I played my way through the game.

It worked well; I was satisfied. Much of the time, I was able to work
things out on my own, then check the guide to make sure I hadn't
missed anything important. Sometimes I was unable to win a mini-game
even with the book's help (just didn't have the dexterity or tenacity
for it). Once or twice, I discovered a technique that worked better
than what the book suggested. The main thing was that I kept the
story going and got to play it through all the way to the end.

That kind of game, to me, is just a form of light entertainment. I'm
not looking to develop skill, which is what I do when I play cribbage,
backgammon, chess, go, or other games. I know I'm only going to play
this DS game once and be done with it, so the important thing is to
just make it an enjoyable experience.

Another reason I like having a strategy guide to fall back on in this
kind of game is that it's a LONG game. There's nothing worse than
getting well into a game, having devoted hours and hours to it, and
then suddenly finding that your position is hopeless. All the care
you put into it now counts for nothing; tragedy and loss are imminent
and inevitable. Your only consolation is that you can start over and
play again, and maybe do better next time. But that's like getting
three-fourths of the way up Mount Everest and having to turn back and
maybe try again someday. How many people will have the patience and
tenacity to start something like that over again?

I've come to prefer shorter games most of the time. In those, a loss
is no big deal; you can happily start over and try again. But when I
tackle a very long game--just for the epic feel of it--I want to be
pretty sure there will eventually be a happy outcome as long as I pay
attention and work for it.

My wife is that way when it comes to novels. In a bookstore, she'll
peek at the end of the book she's thinking of buying. If it doesn't
have a happy ending, it goes back on the shelf. She hates the thought
of spending hours reading a book, only to be disappointed with the
ending. So, she hedges that bet and doesn't mind the "spoiler."

[davidthegeek]

For books actually based on games I would say that I just have
strategy guides. I'll buy the guide with the game and almost never
use it. They just collect dust in the hopes that sometime after I
finish the game once I might pick it up and use it. There are a few
game guides that I have noticed that are actually good reads. Mostly
from it either having witty banter or even making fun of the game at
points.

This hasn't been brought up yet and it might not count in this
discussion but I'm a large fan of fiction novels based on games. I've
read a lot of Battletech and Mechwarrior books along with books based
in the Warhammer 40,000 universe. I mostly just enjoy the books but
some give more insight to the game on why certain rules are the way
they are. Plus whats a game if it doesn't have any history. A game
has to have history for it to even be known and recognized as
something that could stand up to the trials of time.

I used to play a lot of Dungeons & Dragons and I'm not happy with the
new 4th edition but every so often I'll see the books in a bookstore
or a hobby store and just get an itching to buy them just to have
them. That's how I was with RPG books. I'd buy them just to increase
my collection. I say them as collector's items much like my video
game strategy guides.

[Sukunai]

My experience with bookstores is also that games always seems to have
a section. It's small, but it always seems to be there.
Wish I knew precisely how much was sold in that category though.

Role gaming books seem to be sporadic. I notice that Dungeons and
Dragons always appears when a store is new, and is gone within a year
as I suppose stores learn, 'let the customer order the book if they
want it'. Generally speaking, even in purpose oriented comic gaming
stores, role gaming books are only shelf items for a few weeks to a
month when it gets released. After that your market is saturated and
there's little point in stocking it.

Some games though are timeless. If you have a gaming store, some games
are just assumed to be there. But anything based on a standard 52 deck
of cards, well you can buy a deck of cards nearly anywhere. But decent
books require a decent book store.