I’m disappointed that I can no longer find Kbones in Barnes & Noble. The first few issues were on the bookstore’s newsstand, but that’s no longer the case, at least in the two I’ve visited recently. (I did talk a woman into buying Compatibility while visiting B&N; perhaps I should be installed in the store instead.)

By the way, Games Magazine included Rocketville in its Games 100 issue after first reviewing the game in August. I still haven’t tried the game, but I imagine it’s aimed at a non-gamer audience, who will likely find the game different, yet enjoyable.

I love knucklebones. I’ve subscribed since issue 1 (which I got for free at Chi-Tag last year) and have read (and saved) every issue since. In fact, the most recent issue came last week and I left it somewhere, so I went on a mission to find a replacement copy. Luckily, my B&N had it, so I’m back in KBones.

I actually just subscribed to Games yesterday, but I like the puzzles. I like that they have some game reviews, though I wish for more.

I think a lot of the criticism for both is that all reviews are positive, but I think that’s the only way you can do it for a general-audience magazine. I think the reviewers genuinely like the games, so it’s not like they’re shilling for the man.

I also love Kbones!  But as stated above, I was able to find the first few issues at my local Books-a-Million, but have not seen it there for a while now.  Our Barnes & Noble does not carry it, nor does the Waldenbooks in the local mall.

I was going to make sure I picked up each copy as it came out, to encourage them to keep carrying it (and thereby, hoping it would attract others who might see it on the stand). I guess I’ll need to just go ahead and subscribe, but is there a reason its been scarce lately?

Here is some information relayed to me by the Editor of Knucklebones:

New readers can get a trial issue here: http://www.kbones.com/subscribe/trial.asp

They’ll end up getting a bill (though the first issue is free), but they just have to write “cancel” on the bill and return it if they’re not interested in subscribing.

They can also order the most recent issue here: http://www.jonespublishing.com/kbones_pastissues.asp?ID=138

Other issues can be ordered here: http://kbones.com/issues/default.asp (though some are sold out)

As for not finding the magazine in bookstores, we’re still out there, but it’s up to the individual stores to decide whether to carry it (or discontinue carrying it, most likely due to low sales). The best way to get it back in their local bookstores is to talk to a manager and request it. The magazine can also be found in game shops. We have a retailer listing in each issue, but there are many more game retailers out there who carry the magazine (they go through distributors, so unfortunately we don’t have a list of these stores). Readers can also subscribe. I believe there’s an ad running in the magazine right now for a $19.95 subscription (about $8 off the newsstand price).

The glass is half full, not half empty. That, I believe, is the philosophy that drives the positive approach that Knucklebones takes with their game reviews.

Serious strategy gamers are more likely to be disappointed by the slightest imperfection in a new game. As they accumulate hours of gameplay the prolific board gamer (usually) becomes more jaded and more difficult to please.

The mythical ‘average’ gamer, however, is still subsisting on a diet of Monopoly, Sorry, and Risk, so they have a greater tolerance for imperfection and find joy easier then they find disappointment in new game experiences.

This doesn’t mean flaws should be ignored by a reviewer, but they can be deemphasized in cases where the reviewer has found that the good points of the game outweigh any negatives.

The reviews in Knucklebones, several of which Greg and Eric have written, tend to be well written and generally positive, but also explain any problems the reviewer found with the game.

Reviews written this way, I think, allow the average, or casual gamer, to get a sense of how much ‘fun’ can be had with the game, while the more serious, or more frequent, gamer can get insight into the nuts and bolts of the game as well.

As for availability of Knucklebones, as others have stated, our Books A Million used to carry Knucklebones, but I don’t know if they still do.

Also, I do know that HobbyTown USA has had copies of recent issues as well.

Kevin wrote: The reviews in Knucklebones, several of which Greg and Eric have written, tend to be well written and generally positive, but also explain any problems the reviewer found with the game.

Thanks for the kind words, Kevin. One of my first Kbones reviews (of the Kidult game Casanova, which was given to me for review) was quite negative, and the editor asked whether I wanted to review another game instead. She explained that the mag has limited space and prefers to cover games that reviewers would recommend playing and buying, despite the flaws they have, rather than tell readers to avoid a game.

I can imagine the same situation at other magazines. If our mag reviews ten foreign movies that readers will likely not be familiar with, we’d do a greater service by pointing out which of the hundreds of movies on the market they should consider seeing.

Just a quick correction:  apparently the savings for subsribing to Knucklebones is about $15 off the newsstand price.  Pretty good deal!

I subscribe to KBones… and find it a decent read.  Too bad its bimonthly, but then I suppose I’d rather not pay more than I do now…

Now if I could only get an answer from their customer service department… ;)

I guess I will be the grumpy one here. (sigh) First off, the magazine needs a name that will carry over and identify with its intended audience.  I don’t think “Knucklebones” does that.  Also, I think the thing I commonly see in these “non-gamer” directed publications is the semi-transparent attempt to “convert the masses"… by slipping in lots of gamer content.  Hence the expected result (as seen from the non-gamer “masses” perspective)… which is that you can’t find Knucklebones in stores.  And I would probably guess the reason why this is is because no one is buying it in the volume needed to sustain it on the shelves.  That is usually the reason stuff comes down off the shelves in the first place.  We can all belabor the point… but I will hazard a guess that the general public agrees with me.  Voting with their hard earned paycheck.

My game nights are almost exclusively with what I can only honestly say are “non-gamer” friends.  I dunno.  It’s kinda of like a little social gathering with us that we have occassionally.  We have fun.  But as a test, I have thrown out game ideas such as Carccasonne, Settlers etc.  And I get completely blank stares.  They can’t even spell Carccasonne… and heck, neither can I! (LOL) The masses just don’t identify with it.  But my friends all go nuts over I’m the Boss, Pirates Cove and Ticket to Ride. 

And it is really not hard to understand why.  There IS a reason for those games success at our kitchen table.  Just as there is a reason that Ticket to Ride has sold over 300,000+ copies and counting.  Which to me is perfectly understandable.

Sorry Greg.  As for me, “I will go with what I know"… and so I will probably be reaching for my usual copy of National Geographic Adventure over the next printed version of gaming bliss the next time I am in the bookstore.  But I do wonder… would I have missed NGA and just walked right on by if they had called it “Knucklebones” instead?

Ryan B.

Having been guided through the board gaming hobby with ‘Games and Puzzles’ magazine in the 70s and ‘Games’ magazine in the 80s and 90s, I wish that ‘Knucklebones’ had MORE puzzles.

Logic problems, crossword puzzles, sudoku puzzles, word and number puzzles—along with game-related puzzles—all have their place in a magazine such as this.  Without more puzzles to draw in the general public I fear that KB is doomed to fail.

Gaming articles are almost secondary… much of the gaming information can be readily found on web sites like boardgamegeek or here at boardgamenews… as well as many of the gaming blogs out there.  The only thing that makes the magazine unique is in its puzzles.

Back in 1981, when ‘Games and Puzzles’ split into two magazines, one related to games and one with puzzles only, they both failed… the editors of KB have to find the ‘magic’ mix of puzzles and informative articles in order to survive.

Hey, Jim!  Well, we have a difference of opinion here.  If K-Bones decided to let puzzles dominate the magazine, then we’d simply have another version of Games magazine.  Why bother?

No, I much prefer the magazine concentrate on board and card games, with a smattering of puzzles included.  This makes the magazine unique, and fills a much-needed niche. 

As I commented earlier, the vast majority of the general public doesn’t know about the ‘Geek.  Heck, even as enthralled with game as I am, I rarely read reviews or other articles on the Geek.  I’m one of those folks who much prefer a “print” magazine.  Further, I believe most of the articles presented in K-Bones are highly original and cannot be readily found on the Geek or any other game-related forum.  K-Bones does an outstanding job of presenting original, well-written material that just can’t be found elsewhere.

Ryan:

I completely agree with you about the name “Knucklebones”.  I didn’t understand it when it was announced, still don’t understand it, and probably never will understand it.  It conveys nothing of what the magazine is about and is slightly distasteful sounding to boot.  To be fair, “Counter” isn’t a great name either, but at least it relates to gaming and besides, it doesn’t rely on newsstand purchases.  Knucklebones just seems like a strange choice of title.

As for attempts to convert the masses--well, why not?  What’s the point of a gaming magazine if it doesn’t deal with gaming?  I’m sure you’d stop reading National Geographic if it kept running articles about things that were happening in your home town--you already know about those.  Similarly, if K-bones only had articles about Monopoly and Trivial Pursuit, there would be little point to the mag.  A good magazine should entertain and educate--I can’t see how that’s offputting.

K-bones doesn’t sell in stores because not that many people are interested in boardgaming.  That doesn’t mean that it shouldn’t exist, merely that there’s a limit to how popular it can ever become.  I’m not sure how it could become any more populist and still fill up an issue.  Even if it could, I don’t see that helping sales much.

Finally, it’s good that you’ve found titles that your non-gamer friends can enjoy, but those aren’t the only ones with mass appeal.  The game that most closely matches Ticket to Ride’s niche has to be Carcassonne.  Both are easy to learn, fun to play, and non-threatening.  They are the two quintessential gateway games of our time and putting them in separate categories seems strange.  TtR’s sales are very gratifying (particularly to Alan Moon!), but I’m pretty sure Carc has sold even more games.  And both are dwarfed by Settlers’ sales, mostly because it’s almost as good of a gateway game as the other two.  Outside of personal taste, I guess I just don’t see the distinction.

Back to Knucklebones.  I was hoping that it would be able to present information interesting to experienced gamers in a mass market format.  Some early articles on Moon and Franz Vohwinkel did just that and were excellent.  From what I’ve heard, they may not have been able to maintain that, which is too bad.  I also continue to have problems with a “no negative reviews” policy.  Sure, you don’t want to scare anyone off, but you also want to be able to guide less informed readers as well.  Most reviewers tend to write about games they like, so it’s not like you’d see an epidemic of negative articles.  The real problem to me is that as long as that policy is in place, the magazine loses all credibility.  I use the reviews in Games Magazine strictly to find out about mechanics, because they have no other value--they like everything.  If the K-bones reviews continue to discuss problems along with good points, that shouldn’t be as serious a problem, but it’s still a warning sign.  Readers aren’t stupid, and regardless of how much they know about gaming, most of them will realize that the reviewed games can’t ALL be good.

Ryan wrote: I think the thing I commonly see in these “non-gamerâ€? directed publications is the semi-transparent attempt to “convert the massesâ€?… by slipping in lots of gamer content.

You can say that about almost any magazine: The Nation wants to convert the masses to the left; National Review, to the right; Outside, to dangerous outdoor activities; Playboy, to a swinging, name-dropping lifestyle; and so on.

Every magazine has an ideal market, and their articles should be directed at that market. Now, it may turn out that the market isn’t big enough, can’t find the magazine, doesn’t want to spend the money on the magazine, doesn’t like the writing style or presentation, or otherwise won’t support the mag. A magazine can fail for any number of reasons, but unless it’s a news publication (and even those aren’t exempt) it should always be writing articles to “convert” the readers. Otherwise, what’s the point of publishing it?

He then wrote: I have thrown out game ideas such as Carccasonne, Settlers etc. And I get completely blank stares. <snip> The masses just don’t identify with it. But my friends all go nuts over I’m the Boss, Pirates Cove and Ticket to Ride.

Wha?! If your friends play I’m The Boss and Ticket to Ride, why wouldn’t they play Settlers and Carcassonne? The masses don’t have to identify with these games; they just have to play them! What can someone identify with in TtR other than the satisfaction of placing plastic trains in a contiguous route? Of connecting distinct points to satisfy the requirements of a randomly distributed piece of cardboard?

Hearing a game described is nothing like playing the game. New players always think a new game is more complicated than it really is. I had a new person who was flipping out while I was describing the rules for Diamant. She was baffled; “this is the craziest game I’ve ever heard of,” she said. But once we started playing, everything went fine. She then played TransAmerica and Bohnanza and did fine with both of them.

Next time, don’t just throw out the game ideas—get out Settlers or Carcassonne, put the game on the table, and start playing!

Larry wrote: I use the reviews in Games Magazine strictly to find out about mechanics, because they have no other value--they like everything.  If the K-bones reviews continue to discuss problems along with good points, that shouldn’t be as serious a problem, but it’s still a warning sign.  Readers aren’t stupid, and regardless of how much they know about gaming, most of them will realize that the reviewed games can’t ALL be good.

It’s a question of space, Larry. If you have X pages devoted to reviews and you can publish X pages about good games, then why not focus on the good games? (Note that I don’t consider all of the reviewed games in Kbones to be good. Many aren’t to my tastes.)

No, readers aren’t stupid, but for the most part they also aren’t devotees of the gaming world, so they’re not eagerly anticipating the new Teuber game and waiting to see what the reviews say before they buy it. Entertainment Weekly reviews most of the movies that come out each week, praising and panning in roughly equal amounts. If a Gaming Weekly existed—that’ll be the day!—I’m sure it would do the same, but with a bimonthly schedule, there’s far more games than space, thus the focus on games that reviewers feel are worth playing and buying.

I’m taking the same approach right now with my site, FunandBoardgames.com. I’m posting a new review almost every day, which means I will need to cover the dregs at some point, but that time is way down the road. I can recommend good games from the past decade for years before I need to start panning new releases.

As with Kbones and Games, my goal is to recommend games that readers might like. Get someone playing! There’s plenty of time in the future to warn them away from something else.

You and other readers might not like all the choices I make, you might think I’m recommending bad games, but that’s a matter of taste. I am trying to include negative aspects to some degree, but I’m also trying to keep to a schedule, which limits the amount that I can write about any one game.

But it’s not just the dregs, Eric.  There are some games which are released with much fanfare which simply aren’t very good.  Rocketville is a perfect example.  If a magazine devoted to gaming can’t warn players about the potential problems with this design, it’s just not doing its job.  The review doesn’t have to be all negative, it could mention the type of players who might like the game.  But a standard sunny review could do much damage.  You know as well as I do that as many people are put off gaming through a bad first experience as are attracted to it by a good one.  The occasional negative review could help avoid that.  It’s also certain that after the 100th good-news review that Joe Non-gamer is going to start to wonder about the usefulness of these comments.  It isn’t necessarily a huge issue and it isn’t uncommon (in addition to Games, Herb Levy insists on positive reviews in Gamers Alliance), but I do feel it leads to problems in credibility and usefulness, and not just for experienced gamers.

Larry wrote: It’s also certain that after the 100th good-news review that Joe Non-gamer is going to start to wonder about the usefulness of these comments.

You stated earlier that you use the reviews in Games Magazine to find out about mechanics, so those reviews are useful to you despite their relentless positivity. I would think that Joe Non-gamer can do the same.

Ideally a reviewer can present a positive view on a game while still giving you enough information to decide whether you might like it or not. A glowing review of a new romantic movie, for example, tells me enough (i.e., it’s a romance) that I know to avoid it. (That said, “The Unbearable Lightness of Being” is one of my favorite films.)

I need to play Rocketville sometime and find out for myself what the game is like…

I believe any magazine that includes reviews should have a balance.  For quite a while I subscribed to a Computer Gaming rag, and what they did with their review section was to include a wide range of games, grading each like you would a term paper.  You could see at a glance which ones to avoid, and which ones you might want to read in more detail.

Again, they were always a matter of opinion, but that’s what I’m paying for - I want to learn some more about a game without actually having to buy it first. And the wide range introduced me to a bunch of titles that I’d never even heard of, which was always good (whatever the grades they gave them).

Yes you can find out about boardgames on the net, as most of us obviously do - but you can say that about any subject or hobby nowadays. What I find most disheartening is the fact that there can be SEVERAL magazines devoted to tattoos, Hemp, radio controlled aircraft, paintball, fantasy football, etc. and ‘our’ hobby can’t seem to keep one title active on the bookstore shelves.

It’s about Marketing!  : )

The common “gamer” strategy is to work to convince people to just play those games.  But for the masses the game has to look attractive and be identifiable.

I liken it to art.  Gamers are like art critics.  Gamers who are game designers are usually always striving to be Van Gogh.

But Alan Moon and Ticket to Ride are the Thomas Kinkade’s of the world.  They’re works are “pretty”, have common themes that resonate with a broad buying audience and are easy for everyone to identify with.... because when you look at it, you already know what the painting is about.

Of course, the art critics always want you to see the masterpiece which is the Van Gogh.  But hey… I can’t readily identify with it, it’s too surreal and I sure as heck can’t hang it on my living room wall. 

But the Thomas Kinkade sure will look nice there, however.  : )

And the art critics can’t bear to hear that. They can’t for the life of them understand why.  The decision to them should be logical and obvious. But that doesn’t matter to Joe and Jane Baby Boomer… they are happy with their Kinkade (Monopoly) and all is right with the world.

The moral:  There are more than a few lessons to be learned from Hasbro here.  It’s about the marketing.

I’m not sure what you’re responding to, Ryan, but that won’t stop me from responding. If you present Ticket to Ride, Carcassonne, and Settlers to non-gamers, all three of these games “are ‘pretty,’ have common themes that resonate with a broad buying audience, and are easy for everyone to identify with.... because when you look at [one of them], you already know what the [game] is about.” Look, I’m connecting cities! Look, I’m making castles and roads! Look, I’m colonizing an island!

And Joe and Jane Baby Boomer *aren’t* happy with Monopoly.  They’ll give it as gifts (particularly one of the themed versions, for their friend who loves NASCAR that they don’t know what else to give him), but they won’t play it themselves.  Hasbro’s marketing strategy is openly predicated on people giving games as gifts that won’t be played.  That’s a great strategy for a company’s bottom line, but it does nothing for people who actually like to play games.

Now if you’re trying to say product tie-ins are important, sure I agree, and publishers could do this more than they currently do.  But emulating Hasbro doesn’t sound very useful to me.

I think that in Ryan’s example of Ticket to Ride, Carcasonne, and Settlers of Catan two of those three games have unfamiliar words right on the box cover. Now, you may say that it is silly for people to get put off by something unfamiliar on a game box, but if it happens, it happens.

I also think that Larry may have hit on a key point (perhaps unintentionally) when he mentioned “it does nothing for people who actually like to play games.” The number of people who fall in that category is likely far smaller than those of us who are hobbyists would often like to believe. Most people just don’t like to play games, for whatever reason. Not everyone has an inner spielfriek just waiting to get exposed to the “right” games. This is not a bad thing. Or necessarily a good thing, for that matter.

To tie that back in to what Ryan was saying, it is going to be far harder to get the average person interested in a game with a picture of a medieval tower and long foreign name that they likely couldn’t pronounce, much less spell themselves, than one that has a picture of a train that shares a titel with a Beatles song. It is not so strange that this is so. Just because we as hobbyists classify the games in the same category of “Gateway” doesn’t mean that the general public will also view them equally.

Paul, I actually agree with you--most people don’t like to play games and many of them will never be convinced to do so.  But if we want to expand the hobby (which I assume is what this thread is all about), we need to focus on the people who do or who might want to.  My point is that emulating Hasbro makes no sense since much (not all) of that company doesn’t care about the games.  It IS all about the marketing, but only so that it can maximize the movement of content-free items.  What we’re presumably trying to do is expose more people to enjoyable games.  They don’t have to be Puerto Rico, but they also don’t have to be Simpsons LCR, either.

Paul,

Your post was completely “spot on” and captured the essence of what I am trying to say. 

W. Eric.

Don’t mind me.  Just the idle ramblings of someone not sure of what they are responding to either! (LOL) I get paid to babble for a living.  ; )

All,

My position on this issue of “gateway games” is fairly unique for this community.  I speak as someone who love boardgames.... just from a more simplistic sense, I suppose.

Ticket to Ride can be the next Sudoku.  It can be the next Poker.  The game, with its continued sales and popularity, has a chance to be what no other game in the existing boardgame world can be, in my opinion.  Which is:  The absolute transition from Monopoly to “better games” for the masses. 

The problem is that there are very, very few games being made at the level of Ticket to Ride… to help support the transition for ALL people to accept games as a approachable alternative to other forms of electronic entertainment media available today.

Ticket to Ride is a game *everyone* can latch on to.... one that could bring about the boardgame reinassance that so many in the gaming community pine for.

Unfortunately, it looks more and more like Ticket to Ride was used by Days of Wonder simply as the financial powerhorse… to begin making the type of games Days of Wonder really, truly wanted to make… which is “gamer games” on an unprecedented scale.  And so we now have.... BattleLore.

Days of Wonder was the last great hope, in my opinion, to bring masses to the experience of what the next generation of boardgames could be.  But it genuinely looks like they have abandoned their original strategy of “games for the masses"… for games for “gamers”. 

I have a friend, who is a well respected gamer… who when I was sort of experiementing in the “gamer” circles really stood up and defended me.  Unbeknownst to me, many people in this gaming group were lightheartedly complaining that I never wanted to play the *big* games like Puerto Rico, Powere Grid, Wallenstein.  I always wanted to play the little, “dopey” games like For Sale, I’m the Boss etc.  Someone threw up the comment: “Well if that is all he wants to play, why does he even bother to come?” My friends reply?  “Ryan is exactly the type of person who we are trying to introduce to these games.”

My point:  Gamers want the masses to come to them… on their terms.  But this is exactly why the masses have not come.  Hasbro gets ridiculed in the gaming community… but regardless if their games are never played and always are given as gifts, those are the games which are being sold. And those are the games that when all the options are put out on the table for “What should we play tonight?"… those games are what’s available to the masses for choices.

I realize my opinion is a “voice in the wilderness” for the gaming community.  It is not what the gaming community wants to hear.  And it is not a popular opinion.  But it is an opinion supported by the existing reality.  Boardgames are still a niche hobby.  But they don’t have to be.

Read Paul’s post again.  Carefully.  He’s “spot on”.

It’s about the marketing.

Ryan, I hope you’re right, but it doesn’t match my own experience.  Greg S. has also been harping on marketing for years (although with designs a little more gamerly than TtR--but not much more), and I respectfully disagree with him as well.  I focus on the other thing Paul said:  most people just don’t like to play games.  I find the gulf between non-gamer and casual gamer to be enormous.  It can be bridged, but I have neither the time nor the inclination to do it except in very special cases (i.e., my wife).

TtR is probably the best gateway game ever created, but my explanations of the game to non-gamers usually aren’t very smooth.  It’s yet another game that plays fine as long as Larry comes inside the box.  But it’s not hard to imagine a cold game with first timers not working out well.  There is a reasonable number of rules, not all of them are intuitive, and the endgame can come as a shock.  Bad first impressions often lead to a game being consigned to the closet forever.

Gaming is probably more healthy in the U.S. than it’s ever been.  This has been accomplished through a big increase in American publishers as well as a nice slow growth among non-gamers.  This growth could be accelerated, but I’m actually quite happy with the current situation.  Ticket has sold over half a million games--that’s huge.  I can envision circumstances where that number could be an order of magnitude greater, but it’s not clear to me the world would be a much better place if it was.

Paul,

I keep re-reading your post. You really hit the nail on the head.

Great post.

Larry,

Sure it would be a better place! I know the game publishers would think so. (LOL) Besides, look how easy it would be to get a game started!

BTW, Ticket to Ride is a pretty easy game to pick up and learn, in my opinion.