Scott, like you I used to look forward to the new Games 100 issue each year. I discovered many interesting (and more than a few disappointing) games through its pages.

I also discovered that, with the lead times of print publishing, the editors did not always do the best job in verifying that something was actually in print. Then, as now, release dates were etched in something much less permanent than stone and the occasional game would appear in the list that would not actually see publication until later year. Once, I called the publisher of a game listed to see where I could find a copy, since my FLGS and my catalog sources both told me that they could not get it. It turned out that the game had gone back for a major redesign and would probably not see publication for another year and a half (and even that estimate ultimately turned out to be overly optimistic in the end)!

By and large, they’ve done a decent job with the game of the year in recent years. While it might not always be the game that I would choose, the game was at least interesting enough to merit my considering picking it up. While I have no real problems with the Game of the Year winners (again - this is recent… they have chosen some truly wretched titles in the past!), I have a huge problem with the games they chose in the categories. In most cases, the game chosen for a category winner doesn’t even fit my guess as to what the category means (more on this in a minute...), much less appeal to me as the strongest game eligible (or even nominated).

Perhaps my biggest gripe is with the categorization, though. Of course, for me, categorization has always been a problem - I truly dislike the categories that BoardGame Geek has chosen for its awards and the categories that stores try to classify their music, books and movies under mystify me, in spite of having spent over a decade managing stores in all three fields.
So for me to have problems with the vagueness of the categories that Games magazine choses or how frequently the games that are nominated in a category don’t really seem to fit in that category (Sheer Panic is an excellent example of this, but it is far from the only one) is not surprising.

Still, I think Games has improved in its coverage of boardgames in the past few years and it is much more relevant to hobby than it was in the past. Still, a glance at Spielbox shows us that it has a long way to go…

Scott, I’ve played Aunt Millie’s a couple of times, so I’ll try to write a First Impression before I forgot about the game. Short take: It’s cute enough, has fewer rules than Ca$h’n Gun$, and is more socially acceptable than pointing a gun at someone.

As David suggests, the lead time needed for printing means that the editors of the section, John McCallion and Robin King, probably assembled the complete list of 100 titles before Essen even happened. Magazines typically work at least two months ahead, and the Dec. issue of GAMES goes on sale in early November.

Eric

Wow, I think I’d disagree with much of your opinions on the Games 100, Scott.  I guess that just goes to show how tastes in games vary.

Just a couple of things I thought I’d note:

I didn’t care much for Zooloretto.  I’m more surprised it won the German award than it failing to win an award from Games Magazine.  (Its a fine game, a good one, I just like other ones better for the weight, time played, etc...)

I agree that many of the games 100 are hit or miss, but I’d strongly disagree with limiting the Games 100 to games released in the past year.  While you and I may have been reading the top 100 games since the 70s, not everyone has encountered all these games.  Having some top “new-ish” games appear for a year or two sounds good to me. (They sort of imply this by having that “hall of fame” category, meaning that’s where the great games go when they leave the list...) Also, determining just “when” a game is released is a tricky business.  So many gamers online consider a European release to be the release date, whereas I personally don’t consider a game “released” until I can see a copy in the FLGS.

Regarding categories, I find some of their placement of games different than I would personally choose, but they tend to be decent.  Regarding “Family Strategy” I like that category, it means the kind of game I can stretch my family into playing, but it won’t bore them to death.  Shear Panic is a perfect example.  It is a little abstract, but with the player cards listing every move possible, non-gamers can belly up to the table and play through the game without too much trouble.  (I got my parents playing it mostly due to the very cute pieces… thus the theme is much stronger than would be found in an abstract game...) I’d also argue that Shear Panic is a better family game than Mission: Red Planet (which is much more contentious...) While you might like Mission: Red Planet as a better game I think Shear Panic is a better “Family Strategy” game.  (It fits the category better.)

Re: Battlelore, I too think this is a great game for this past year.  However, it could be that it just didn’t fit into any of the categories very well.  (Although Wargame would probably fit, despite the strong fantasy theme...)

In any case, listing 100 “good” games with a brief overview is a great undertaking and I will still give kudos to Games Magazine for bringing (some of ) the best of boardgaming to the broader public.  I write a holiday boardgame guide each year and am always agonizing over leaving off the “great” games of past years.  (Games like Ticket to Ride, Heroscape, and Puerto Rico could be on the list nearly every year… they’re still great suggestions.)

Eric,

Ahhhh the old “more socially acceptable” tack.  Well played.

Funny you should bring that up.  My friend, Lindsay, who was a ministerial student when I invited her to play Ca$h ‘n Gun$ flatly refused to play it at first due to the theme.

Undaunted, though, I pressed her to trust me and just try the game.  She played it and now loves it, but insists that we never let her mother know that she plays and enjoys it so much.

You have to fight those social maxims person by person.

Matt,

While we might disagree on specific games, it seems our general views are very similar:

“In any case, listing 100 “good” games with a brief overview is a great undertaking and I will still give kudos to Games Magazine for bringing (some of ) the best of boardgaming to the broader public.”

“Regarding categories, I find some of their placement of games different than I would personally choose, but they tend to be decent. “

“I agree that many of the games 100 are hit or miss”

Regarding some of our specific differences…

Coming away from my first playing of Zooloretto I felt exactly the same as you. I wasn’t wowed by it.  But then my subsequent experience differs from you.  In demoing for Rio Grande Games, I’ve since taught Zooloretto to easily over 40 families at two trade shows.  With only a few exceptions, the families really enjoyed the game.  It’s quick to learn, fits its theme, has player interaction, and has some light family level decisions to make throughout the game.

While I enjoyed Shear Panic, and have taught it a few times, people seem to think it’s more of a brain-burny abstract.  Sure it has cute pieces, to make it more visually appealing, but between the two, I think Zooloretto would get more play from a family over time.

Regarding Mission: Red Planet being more contentious.  I don’t disagree with you.  Maybe it’s just my family, but contentiousness isn’t a reason to avoid a game.  You have not seen maliciousness until you’ve seen my nephews and nieces playing Burg Appenzell, trying to drop their opponents mice into holes. 

I grew up playing Sorry! and still remember the glee I’d feel sending my sister’s, mother’s or father’s piece back home.  I’d like to think that I’ve grown up to be a good sport, so possibly having “contentious” games gave me some experience with this.

Re: “Having some top “new-ish” games appear for a year or two sounds good to me.” This is the only point you made that I’m going to disagree with.  While it might not be a bad idea to separately highlight the top games in previous years in some sort of remembrance list, or even point out how customers can find games that were on previous lists, enough decent games come out each year that I don’t see the point in limiting their number so that some games can be repeated.  If people really want to explore more games they’ll be able to find older games with only a few clicks on the internet.

The intro to the Traditional Games 100 mentions that the list is without duplicates from the previous year for the second year in a row.  Your letter worked.

Like you, Scott, the Games 100 was once an invaluable resource for me.  Back in the early eighties, there was no internet to check and probably few gamers organized enough to take advantage of it had it existed.  So I eagerly looked forward to the annual appearance of the Games list.  It was through one of those issues that I learned about Eon Games, including Cosmic Encounter and the game that became my all-time favorite for over 15 years, Borderlands.  There were other small run games I picked up and greatly enjoyed thanks to the Games 100.  It truly was a gamer’s best friend.

These days, the hardcore gamer has plenty of other sources for gaming news (like, say, BGN).  But the list still serves as a valuable resource for more casual gamers.  I agree that they’ve done a good job with their Games of the Year selections over the past several years--they’re all very good games and appropriate for their readership.  Their category choices this year are, um, interesting.  But these are just the preferences of a small number of people and don’t pretend to be anything else, so it makes no sense to get too excited over these.  It’s still a fine list of games, as it is every year, and each edition features more and more BGN style games.  Great job as usual by John and Robin.

I’ll be the first to admit I really haven’t given Zooloretto a fair shake (yet).  I will agree that Shear Panic would end up second to Zooloretto over the long term for most families.  (Due to the brain-burning part of it… however, one can play Zooloretto pretty intensely or Shear Panic rather lightheartedly, depending on the game atmosphere.)

We’ll have to agree to disagree about new releases.
I don’t think there are 100 games every year that need to be in a “top 100”.  Top 50, maybe.  Perhaps even a top 75 with 25 or so best-of games from the previous year. 

A final quibble: I think it is unfair to complain about any game being “old” on the list if it has been released in the past 2 years.  So many games come out at Essen, then in English a few months later… A reviewer needs time to review all the games released, made harder in the Essen/Holiday rush, etc… so I could see many games not making it onto the radar until the following year.