I think your coverage is perfect, you do just German games and that’s all I play.  I’m assuming there’s already plenty of other resources out there for CCGs, miniatures, RPGs…

So you have decided to narrow the focus of this site.  Are you going to change the name of this site to “German Style Boardgame News?” Board games are board games.  While you may need to decided what needs to be covered, your decisions reveal something of the type of games *you* like to play Rick.  Why do I think that you rarely play a Steve Jackson game or a Looney Labs game?

I’m not saying I’m a big fan of Steve Jackson Games but I do enjoy playing the occasional game of Fluxx.  Different people like different games.  There’s no shame in that.  Not everyone enjoys playing “heavy” games.  In fact I prefer ethe light to medium weight games.

No one expects this site to cover RPGs or CCGs.  Neither are boardgames.  Miniatures are “tabletop” games, but not boardgames.  CMGs are something of a hybrid as most do have a board of some type, but they are collectible which, to my mind, means they do not fall under the “boardgame” category.

My point here is that not being able to cover all boardgames is understandable.  Making a concious decision to not cover certain types of boardgames changes the kind of site this is.  It will no longer truely be “Boardgaming News.” It will simply be just another site about German style board games.

And there’s nothing wrong with that, if that’s the kind of site you had in mind when you started BGN.  But calling it “Boardgame News” will then be something of a mis-nomer.

Boardgaming News is a great site and you’ve done a good job with it.  I think it will lose something when you narrow the focus of your coverage.  But then, all good things do come to an end, don’t they?

Hi, Rick. Those are good questions to raise. I think you know your audience very well and know how to manage a great news website. The only point I would make is, even though I’m a eurogaming addict, I’m interested in learning about games from other genres (e.g. mass market, RPG) that have a board or spatial placement aspect, have a theme, are fun, and require good thoughtful decision making. So I would vote to open up your coverage a tiny bit. Regarding RPGs: when one player acts as the referee/storyteller (DM, GM), you have a distinctly different experience from a boardgame, and you shouldn’t cover it. However, when the game doesn’t have a referee and everyone participates equally, and there is a map or board of some kind, then you could cover it. Although RPG-like games are primarily about combat, there is also resource management, exploration, and a strong theme.

Kim -

I find it amusing to hear that I’m ‘narrowing’ the focus of the coverage.  What is stated above is my criteria for what I’ve always covered since I started five years ago, with the very, very minor exception of pruning back coverage of Steve Jackson Games and some Looney Labs games (and, in the scheme of this, this is very, very minor). 

It has nothing to do with what *I* like - it has everything to do with what my readers are interested in.  I’ve been to many, many boardgame events and never, ever seen anyone play a Steve Jackson game.  I have also never seen anyone play Fluxx.  I’m sure it’s happened, but I haven’t seen it.  The games I cover are the games I see boardgamers play.  Looking on Gone Cardboard I can name you game after that I don’t particularly like - I still cover them.

I am only one person and I only have so much time.  Every year the number of games I cover has been getting greater and greater.  Between Gone Cardboard, the Nuremberg and Essen Previews, I probably cover over a thousand games a year now.  There are probably hundreds more released I don’t cover - I am only one man and can’t cover them all.  I have decided to focus on the games that I think are of most interest to my readers and those games don’t include games from Steve Jackson or some games from Looney Labs. 

I simply can’t cover all boardgames.  I can’t physically do it and I think my readers wouldn’t want me to do it either.  Can you imagine if I reported on all boardgames?  You’d had to wade through 50 stories a day to get to maybe 5 that you were interested in.

> I think it will lose something when you narrow the focus of your coverage.  But then, all good things do come to an end, don’t they?

Wow, this is just hurtful.  If you think that this good thing has come to an end just because I’m not covering Munchkin expansions or Stoner Fluxx, well, I guess that’s your opinion.

- Rick

Joe -

As noted in the column, I do cover games from other genres that I think will be of interest to my readers.  At some point, though, that fact that I am only one person and only have so much time restricts me - I simply can’t cover everything.  Be assured that if I do find a game in another genre that I think the readers would be interested in, I’ll do my best to cover it.

- Rick

Hi Rick!
I think you are doing a wonderful job and I think it is necessary to make a selection which kind of games to cover. This is not the only game page on the internet so when I want to learn more about a game than I am finding here, I’m going there, too. I use this page to get an overview about what is going on so it’s good to have some kind of selection. I’m going to Essen this year for my first time. Without this page I hadn’t any idea where to start there.

I guess it depends on what you mean to “cover” a game…

I certainly think you must obviously pare back what games you take a look at and describe (much less the games you test out by playing....)

However, one of the best services you provide on the net (other than opinion content) are the Gone Cardboard pages…

I would like to see you continue that for as much of the broader hobby as you can… Now if it takes up far too much of your time to push folks for updates, inquire about changes, etc… then I guess you can justify scaling back.  However, if you can convince the various companies (Loony Labs, SJG, whatever) to keep you updated of new releases and release dates so that you don’t have to go out and get the information yourself, I think that would be a very valuable service.

I do typically enjoy the standard Euro/designer games the most, but also like some lighter wargames, and am not against playing something silly or party-oriented from time to time. 

Hey, its “your” site, cover what you want, but I would love to at least see the minimal information provided by “gone cardboard”, etc… cover as much of the industry as possible.  (CCGs, minis, and RPGs are typically different enough to safely ignore...)

Rick,

I see that my comments, while not misunderstood, were perhaps not well stated.  I certainly did not mean for my comments to taken as a personal attack on your or your boardgaming coverage.  I certainly did not mean for my comments to be “hurtful.” I guess my attempt at levity was misplaced.

There is no doubt in anyone’s mind that there are more boardgames than one person can reasonably hope to cover.  Nevertheless, you have done a pretty good job of it Rick.  I admire the work you have done and look forward to your convention reports.

Nevertheless, your column amounted to an announcement that you were going to stop covering certain types of games.  Even if this was already your “de facto” policy, it is now your “official” policy.  I was sorry to see this as I think this hobby needs a “Boardgame News” web site.  One site where we can go for news about all boardgames.  Up until now, however imperfectly, BGN has been that site.

I think you do yourself and your audience a dis-service when you say “I have decided to focus on the games that I think are of most interest to my readers” Your audience, I think, is broader than just “German Style Boardgame Players”.  Your most vocal supporters and contributors may be from that niche of game players but I submit that they are just the tip of the iceberg.  There are a lot of us who play many differnt types of games.  Eurogames, Wargames, RPGs, CCGs, CMGs.  Some of us dip our toes in all waters.  Nowdays, I tend to stay in the Eurogame/wargame part of the pool, but I’ve been known to visit the RPG and CCG areas in the past.  My point is that *most* gamers don’t limit themselves to one type of game.

So, my apologies for my earlier comments Rick.  I’m sorry that my inability to put my thoughts into words came across as an attack on you.  That was not my intention.

On a side note, I go to far fewer convetions each year than you Rick, but I almost always see Steve Jackson gaems (usually Munchkin) and Looney Labs games being played.  Different places, different experiences, I guess.

On another side note, have you considered recruiting help in covering different aspects of boardgaming?  I’m talking about volunteer “correspondents” to cover the Steve Jackson, Looney Labs, and other games of the world you don’t have the time to cover.  Boardgame News doesn’t have to have just a single reporter.

Rick, cover whatever you want.  On an almost unrelated note, I mis-heard the name of that new RPG-based boardgame....  I kept referring to it as “The Meat-On-A-Stick Game”.  Which still sounds fun, but not really.

Rick,

Your coverage is fantastic.  Don’t change a thing!

Matt -

What you say is certainly a possibility - if I restricted coverage of certain games to just Gone Cardboard entries I could possibly include more.  It would still take work, though, and I’m already overloaded.  I’ll consider it, though.

Kim -

> I was sorry to see this as I think this hobby needs a “Boardgame Newsâ€? web site.  One site where we can go for news about all boardgames.  Up until now, however imperfectly, BGN has been that site.

Well, I guess you are just going to have to find another site, then. :)

Your implication that ‘up until now’ that Boardgame News was that site is just nonsense.  I’ve been doing the same stuff for years - just because I said what I did doesn’t change one iota what I’ve actually done.

The sticking point seems to be Steve Jackson and Looney Labs.  Let me expand on this.  Over the past few years I have expanded my coverage hugely.  Every year I cover more and more games - it increases by hundreds each year.  I am now covering over a thousand games this year!  As compared to the hundreds of more games I’m covering every year, is the loss of Munchkin expansions and a few Looney Labs games that important?

As far as recruiting help is concerned, I do think that is a good idea.  Along with Matt’s comment, I’m considering doing something like this.  The major consideration is that the coordination of others may end up taking more time than covering the games myself.  I’m going to look into it.

- Rick

I, for one, am glad that your coverage isn’t all-inclusive.  One of the reasons I return to Boardgamenews.com more than any other game site is that it isn’t overwhelming.  It’s just enough for me, thank you.  And I wouldn’t want you to burn out by covering Killer Bunnies or Chez Geek expansions!

Rick, your coverage is fine.  :) Nothing will change, and people need to realize that.

Personally, while I do like Looney Labs, the only game that has ever really appealed to me is the Icehouse game system and its incarnations (Zendo and Icetowers, maybe others).  I agree that this is adequte coverage as far as BGN is concerned.

And as for abstracts, BGN covers the newer ones that are more accessible, and these are often the most distinguished.  Examples: Hive, Oishi, GIPF project, Damiyo, etc.  Indeed, GIPF is the best example of bringing accessible abstracts to the general public (boardgamers and not), with enough elbow room for those who really want to settle themselves into game study.  And this is very arguably fine abstract coverage for a site like BGN---boardgamers very rarely buy into Abstract Magazine, where the real action is....

I think of games in terms of the experience. Designer/eurogames tend to have a rich theme, artwork, bits and cards, and give you a feeling of running a real world enterprise. Because the experience of playing an abstract game is so different from that, I vote for leaving them out (unless the board and pieces are really, really beautiful!).

Rick,

Just curious.  Why was there no coverage on the new Dr. Lucky game?

BTW, I just came out of a medical procedure and am still slightly under the effects of anethesia. (LOL) I have my work laptop with me.

First thing I do is come to this site to see what’s new.  How messed up is this? (LOL)

At least I can spell again!

Ryan -

> Why was there no coverage on the new Dr. Lucky game?

Uh, there was coverage of the new Dr. Lucky game.  I’ve posted a number of stories on it.  I wrote another story about it a week ago.  I will also mention it in my report on the last day of Gencon.  To find the stories, search for Titanic Games.  It’s also on Gone Cardboard under Titanic Games.

- Rick

One thing I’ll say… this column has been a good way to see who’s listening/reading… and apparently lots are.

Personally, I applaud your effort to stay in your sweetspot (Euros, some American-style, and light wargames) because your insight in these areas is solid. I enjoy your informational forays into other areas, as I hunger for the new and shiny, but I do not believe you should feel the need to cover the latest GMT chit release of the 13th hour of Gettysburg (played out in just nine hours!) the way a grognard would.  And why should you learn the ins-and-outs of point-maximization in Hero Clix just to report on their newest wave?  It’s impossible, and it’s nonsense.

By the way, managing your volunteer writers will take more time than it’s worth.  I do this professionally, and I wouldn’t do it on my own dime.

Besides, gamers just like to complain.  Keep doing exactly what you’re doing.  We’re all fine here.

Here’s some help… Munchkin 4: The Need for Steed is made up of funny art and cards, and feels exactly like the the three releases before it.

Coverage needs met!

I just wanted to register my opinions on this:

First of all, Rick is providing an very important service to our community. I commend him for that and hope he continues long into the future. Thanks Rick, for a site full of valuable information that I actually check everyday.

Secondly, it is Rick’s site that Rick has to work on. Therefore, I think he should cover whatever he wants to… or not. He’s doing the work, he should be the one to define it. If wants to change the site name to BoardgamenewswithoutSteveJackson.com, well, more power to him!

Lastly, there ARE people interested in Steve Jackson games. I for one, play Illuminati and am very interested in the upcoming Bavarian Fire Drill expansion. But I’ve learned how to search out information on the web and send emails myself to supplement Rick’s information. If he doesn’t cover Steve Jackson games any longer, that’s inconvenient (for me), but I certainly know how to find and track that information myself.

I think Rick’s most important message is getting buried under the “what to include” topic and that message is “ If you think I’m missing a good boardgame, please let me know.”

Doing this takes tons of work and if new game companies are a problem for Rick to cover because historically the odds of a good game aren’t there then we all need to dabble a little in the new and different and pass on the finds to each other. (I’ll be adding the one shot games I played demos for at GenCon to the BGG database and giving them ratings with comments)

Take it easy Rick, we got your back.

I am happy and content with what gets covered on the site.  It’s nice to know that you are open to suggestions from readers as well, especially in regards to games from new companies.  I do want your take on the Spongebob Squarepants edition of Monopoly, because well, it’s Spongebob and it comes with fancy metal pieces.  Let’s see Ystari use metal pieces!

Rick, I noticed that you mentioned “Stoner Fluxx”.  This is, of course, redundant. Avoiding these sort of ‘inefficiencies’ will give you more time to report on games.

You can please all the people some of the time and some of the people all of the time, but you can’t please all of the people all of the time.

This principal seems to be illustrated quite often in the boardgame community. 

Keep up the good work Rick.  Don’t let nitpicking or a vocal minority get you down.

Hi Rick,

I saw the earlier article with the box cover. for the Dr. Lucky game.  I guess I was really more speaking in reference to your GenCon coverage.  I just had thought you had finished your all of your Gencon reports, that’s all.

And being illiterate, I am always on the prowl for more new game pictures.  Boardgame News as a pop-up picture book… now that’s for me! (LOL)

Seriously though....just remember, even writers are fans… and you’re one of my favorite writers.  So I am always attuned when you have something to say about a game I think I may like.

Peace.

Rick,

I am thoroughly satisfied with the product you put out.  But then again, maybe I’m in your target audience.

I much prefer to have a focused resource like Boardgamenews, so I don’t have to wade through a lot of chaff that makes it more difficult to find useful information.

I will admit, though, that even information about some fringe games (ie. the Order of the Stick game), or games that don’t impress you all that much, can be helpful to be discriminating in my game purchasing. 

Like the scrubbing bubbles, I look to you to do the work, so I don’t have to.  And as I have learned to respect and trust your reviews, appraisals, and opinion, I am extremely happy to support this website.

Just remember Aesop’s fable, The Man and His Two Wives:  If you try to please everyone, you’ll please no one.

(And we like your hair, so we don’t want you to lose it! <laugh>)

Ryan -

I have just posted the report on the last day of Gencon.  You’ll find a report on Kill Doctor Lucky in there.

- Rick

As Rick’s title on the site is “editor,” I’m incredibly grateful that he edits out things that he doesn’t feel would be of interest to most of us who frequent the site.

A great example of this is the convention reports; the number of products outside “our” interest area is typically much greater than what Rick provides for us...and that’s a good thing. I wouldn’t want to wade through all the stuff that’s on the “fringe” of boardgames. I think of Rick as my first level of filter for all the new games announced at these conventions (and even then, I’m really only seriously interested in a small fraction of the games he does cover).

I have a bunch of Steve Jackson games that I don’t play, all of them purchased prior to Rick’s editorial work here and at Gamewire. That by itself speaks volumes.

Fluxx gets played enough by gamers I know to lead me to believe it’s a game of interest to people in the hobby.  It gets referred to a lot on that ultimate measure of geek opinion, the Geeklist.  Personally, I’m not a fan of the game, so whatever you do with it is fine by me.

In my opinion, the entire point is moot.  There is an open forum; if a game a person feels should be covered is not posted, then he/she can write a report and submit it.  Also, along with BGG there are plenty of other sites to fill in any gaps intentionally or unintentionally created.

Rick, what you are accomplishing already is monumental, and I can’t fathom how you have the time to cover what you do.  Before this column, I didn’t realize you even had a limiting threshold of what you covered!  Your track record of providing what you think would be of interest is spot on.  BGN is always the first site I check out.

C’mon folks.  Rick already walks on water; do you expect him to fly too?

I’m with those who would divide coverage into two categories. First the basic hard facts (company X is publishing game Y on date Z) which (especially Essen releases) I want as complete as possible (if in doubt, keep it in). On the wider front (reviews, opinions etc.) the formula seems to be working fine (and on the facts too, actually).