Wiki Eurogame entry
Boyd Bottorff
did the points about lack of randomness in them stick around? Do people
believe that, or were they concentrate on chaning the rest of the
article first?
Ivan Hanley
: I've noticed a few changes to the Eurogame entry on Wikipedia. So
I am guilty of making some changes in the past but there have been a
raft of modifications since I touched it. However I like the way the
article reads now and feel the text on randomness is a fair
reflection - that random elements do not DOMINATE most German games.
Ivan.
Peter Clinch
> I am guilty of making some changes in the past
I don't think "guilty" is the right word here! ;-) The article has
evolved continually over time and I think it's got better with it.
I'll probably do some more polishing: the current "influence" bit
misses that Monopoly still easily outsells all Eurogames in Germany
as well as everywhere else so I think it's a clear overstatement at
present as far as An Average Wiki Reader goes, as opposed to a gamer.
Also I think the complete deletion of the strategic/thinking aspect
takes away a clear distivtion between Eurogames and party games, so
I might try and lever that back in though without quite as much
emphasis on strategy as opposed to just having to think a bit.
> However I like the way the
> article reads now and feel the text on randomness is a fair
> reflection - that random elements do not DOMINATE most German games.
Agreed. I think the current version is the sort of collaborative
evolution and polishing which a wikki entry should be. Though the
text I originally added has been altered quite a bit the point of
it going in has been maintained, the wording has been improved,
better placed through the document subdivisions and so on. Which
is as it should be.
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/
Ivan Hanley
: I don't think "guilty" is the right word here! ;-) The article has
: evolved continually over time and I think it's got better with it.
Yeah, I think the whole wiki thing is excellent.
: I'll probably do some more polishing: the current "influence" bit
: misses that Monopoly still easily outsells all Eurogames in Germany
: as well as everywhere else so I think it's a clear overstatement at
: present as far as An Average Wiki Reader goes, as opposed to a
gamer.
Agreed. I think it's important to establish credability with the
average visitor and Monopoly, Cluedo, etc is still mainstream.
: Also I think the complete deletion of the strategic/thinking aspect
: takes away a clear distivtion between Eurogames and party games, so
: I might try and lever that back in though without quite as much
: emphasis on strategy as opposed to just having to think a bit.
My feelings exactly. As I've said elsewhere its one of the traits
that essentially distinguishes Euros from party games.
: Agreed. I think the current version is the sort of collaborative
: evolution and polishing which a wikki entry should be. Though the
: text I originally added has been altered quite a bit the point of
: it going in has been maintained, the wording has been improved,
: better placed through the document subdivisions and so on. Which
: is as it should be.
It's certainly pretty close to perfect from my point of view and
you're right; what we write get's changed and smoothed out and
clarified, etc which is great. It's just a pity that collaborative
games don't work like a wiki ... now there's an interesting idea :P
Ivan.
brett...@gmail.com
Peter Clinch wrote:
> Ivan Hanley wrote:
>
> > I am guilty of making some changes in the past
>
> I don't think "guilty" is the right word here! ;-) The article has
> evolved continually over time and I think it's got better with it.
>
> I'll probably do some more polishing: the current "influence" bit
> misses that Monopoly still easily outsells all Eurogames in Germany
> as well as everywhere else so I think it's a clear overstatement at
> present as far as An Average Wiki Reader goes, as opposed to a gamer.
> Also I think the complete deletion of the strategic/thinking aspect
> takes away a clear distivtion between Eurogames and party games, so
> I might try and lever that back in though without quite as much
> emphasis on strategy as opposed to just having to think a bit.
>
> > However I like the way the
> > article reads now and feel the text on randomness is a fair
> > reflection - that random elements do not DOMINATE most German games.
>
> Agreed. I think the current version is the sort of collaborative
> evolution and polishing which a wikki entry should be. Though the
> text I originally added has been altered quite a bit the point of
> it going in has been maintained, the wording has been improved,
> better placed through the document subdivisions and so on. Which
> is as it should be.
>
> Pete.
> --
The Influence bit is pretty good now, I think (though, my guess is that
the primary influence German games have had was really on the American
hobby game market).
Since we're discussing changes for the better, I'd like to bring up
another point or two for discussion.
"a tangible (though sometimes very thin) theme."
I wonder if this is too much of an insider-type reference. I only
really hear gamers make reference to a game's theme and its tangibility
or thinness. Is this even a necessary statement? Does anyone look at
Hi Ho Cherry-O and say, "Well, it's a good game to teach kids counting,
but the theme is pretty thin"?
"Random elements do not usually dominate the game: Bridge and
backgammon have more randomness than all but a few German games,
Settlers of Catan having a large degree of randomness for a German
game."
I think this could be handled better. I think it is a myth that German
games have less randomness than most other games. The key difference
is how luck is handled. American games usually use luck to determine
your fate, dictating your moves or the outcome of your action. German
games usually use luck as a form of fortune, providing opportunity and
letting the player make what he can with it on his turn. It is the
fate/fortune dichotomy that, I think, differentiates German and
American games in their handling of luck. If you look at the SdJ
winners of the last 10+ years, the majority have a significant element
of luck (excepting Viilla Paletti and Niagara, which has minimal luck
if I remember correctly, and Torres, if played without the action
cards).
This is probably enough to talk about for now..
Brett
Boyd Bottorff
> another point or two for discussion.
>
> "a tangible (though sometimes very thin) theme."
>
> I wonder if this is too much of an insider-type reference. I only
> really hear gamers make reference to a game's theme and its tangibility
> or thinness.
That edit, I believe, was mine. It replaced something that essentially
pooh-poohed themes in eurogames in general.
I left it mostly in and just changed it, because yeah, sometimes the
themes are really thin. That may or may not affect how good a game is,
or at least how good I perceive a game to be. When the mechanics fit
the game, it's easier for me to intuitively pick up on the rules, plus
it gives the game a bit more "reality", if that makes any sense.
Ivan Hanley
<on the thin theme edit>
: That edit, I believe, was mine. It replaced something that
: essentially pooh-poohed themes in eurogames in general.
:
: I left it mostly in and just changed it, because yeah, sometimes the
: themes are really thin. That may or may not affect how good a game
: is, or at least how good I perceive a game to be. When the
mechanics
: fit the game, it's easier for me to intuitively pick up on the
rules,
: plus it gives the game a bit more "reality", if that makes any
sense.
I kind of agree with brettspiel; that thinness of theme is more
something we gamers think about. It may be that a general description
of the genre does not need to reference anything other than "the do
not attempt to simulate" and "they have a wide variety of themes
(except war)".
It doesn't really bother me either way but I suppose the 'wiki magic'
should smooth over anything that needs it :).
Ivan.
Patrick
>
> I kind of agree with brettspiel; that thinness of theme is more
I agree too. However, I think that what we call theme is *very*
important to *some* people who might read the Wiki article. Not only
"gamers," but Normal People who've played games like chess or cribbage
and also games like Risk or Monopoly. Even if this Normal Person
hasn't seen the word "theme" applied to games before, he still has a
sense that some games are *about* something and others are not.
To me, this is an important distinction. Sometimes games without a
theme seem too sterile or abstract to me, and I start looking for
themed games. Other times I get fed up with heavily themed games
(e.g., RPGs and wargames) and turn to abstract games for relief. So,
the information about German-style games having a "thin veneer of
theme" would be useful to me; it tells me what to expect.
--Patrick