I’m surprised not to see Taluva on either list.  Would different cover art have made the difference?  We’ll never know.

I say Yspahan.  It’s been a hit in my gaming group, and we generally feel that this is SdJ worthy. 

I’m surprised to about Pillars....although, then again, it feels too much like Caylus (ie not as original as others on the list, mechanics-wise).

Our group has lots of fun with Imperial and Yspahan.  With one play we also liked Arkadia.

My vote’s for Arkadia.  Scales well, fun bits. Plays in 45.  Easy to teach.

I like Yspahan better, and am happy to see it on the list.  But Arkadia would also be a good choice.

I haven’t played any of the others yet, but I may need to soon.  Thief of Bagdad might not be too hard to obtain...I’m pretty sure I’ve see it at the FLGS.

I’m glad that Burg Appenzell is at least on the recommended list. It is a fairly abstract placement game, with a weird memory element, and a big nod to Amazing Labyrinth.

I rather like this one better. And is has great little painted plastic mice.

I love Arkadia and Yspahan but I think Zooloretto is the one to beat. Thief of Baghdad is really a pretty minor item and Jenseits is probably not a serious contender, despite its quality.

Well, the big news is Pillars.  I’d say a majority of SdJ prognosticators whose lists I’ve seen not only picked it to be nominated, but to win.  As it turns out, I played it yesterday (ironically, my impression of it improved considerably) and I can kind of see why it might not have been picked.  You’re trying to put together a victory-point engine and that’s not really a family-friendly concept.  Plus, knowledge of the deck, and experience in general, is vital to play well.  Still, I’m awfully surprised it was passed over.

Of the games that WERE picked, this is a surprisingly *unsurprising* list.  Co-favorite Yspahan got the nod.  Arkadia was on most lists (it was on mine too until I talked myself into choosing Wikinger over it).  Zooloretto fits the SdJ mold well.  Despite my scribblings about Jenseits’ lack of buzz, it is, as I also said, a great family game and deserves a nomination.  That’s four games that were all thought to be in the running.  Even Bagdad, the one dark horse, is hardly a prototypical SdJ unknown--it’s gotten quite a bit of play and some very positive reviews.  Despite the absense of Pillars, this is a very strong group of nominees.  I can honestly see any of the top four taking the prize and each of them would make a worthy winner.

Of the recommended games, I’m pleased, but not surprised that Notre Dame made it.  I’m genuinely surprised that Mr. Jack didn’t (I don’t think there’s a two-player game on either list)--maybe the somewhat unsavory theme or the new, tiny publisher are to blame.  Imperial is a bit of a shocker, but there really should be room for at least one true gamer’s game on the recommended list and this is a very worthy choice.  I haven’t heard too many good things about Alchemist, but maybe the Jury was able to figure it out.  And the most welcome pick from my point of view is Der Prestel Kunstmarkt, a game that deserves to be better known than it is (and this should help).

It looks like Rio Grande will be publishing the Spiele des Jahres winner again this year.  Jay really has the ability to spot (and publish) great games.

I think there’s a distribution requirement to who the jury picks because they like to make sure the company can handle the extra sales. Mr. Jack isn’t widely distributed (and currently not being sold, right?) so might have been disqualified on those grounds.

How do the special prizes work? Could they still pick Pillars for the strategy prize?

Queen Games must be pleased - they snagged 2 of the top 5 slots.

You’re probably right about Mr. Jack, Dave.  I was just thinking that, since as a two-player game it had no chance of winning, it could still be nominated in spite of the distribution problems.  I still think that it could get a recommendation regardless of that, but I could be wrong.

As for the special prizes, maybe someone else can help me out with this, but my recollection of the past two years, when special awards were made, was that they were announced along with the nominations and that the special award winners weren’t in the nominated or recommended lists.  So as far as I know, there will be no special awards this year.

Doug.... I was tired of listening how good Arkadia is on your podcast, so I finally ordered it. Unfortunately my order has been held for 3 weeks now because of Notre Dame.  Seeing it on this lists just makes me want to try it even more.

I’m not too surprised about Pillars not making the top 5, but I am about Taluva and Leonardo DaVinci not at least making the recommended list.

The only game I was really surprised was not nominated not recommended too was Leonardo da Vinci. I’m quite sure materials and graphics not at so high level was the principal reason.

I think that all the 5 games nominated are good for the SDJ standard. So, not really big surprises!

good play
Liga

Yspahan’s +++ difficulty rating (making it just as challenging in the Jury’s eyes as Arkadia) does not necessarily bode well for the Ystari game’s chances.  Particularly since a similar rating may have been what kept Pillars from getting nominated.  At the very least, I think it makes Zooloretto and Jenseits (both with ++ ratings) co-favorites with Yspahan.  I don’t agree with that +++ rating, but my opinion isn’t the one that counts.

The other factor is duration.  All of the nominees fall within the magic 60 minute duration except for Jenseits (75-90 minutes).  This is significant; the last 7 SdJ winners all had durations of 60 minutes or less, as did 9 of the last 10 (Tikal, also an archaeological game, was the only exception).  That could make it tough for the Prinz design.

If you want to be a stathead about it, the signs are all pointing toward Zooloretto.  Easy to learn (without being too simple), with a 45 minute duration (just like the last three winners).  With any luck, I’ll get a chance to play it before the announcement is made and that may give me a better feel if this will turn out to be the Year of the Panda.

Robert,

Glad to hear that my pimping of the game has pushed you to buy it! :-) This week’s podcast includes a playing of Pillars as a 2-player and I must say my opinion has warmed up again after the luck of the bag hurting its ranking for me with 4 players especially.

As for Leonardo, I can understand its lack of representation due to the confusion you CAN have with the rules.  I don’t know about others, but learning this cold from the ruleset was painful and would be an obstacle to families buying it and playing it.

And I’d be FINE with any of the games winning, except for maybe Thief as I found it rather pedestrian.

Doug
http://www.garrettsgames.com

After Pillars of the Earth’s surprising omission, Kosmos and co-designer Michael Rieneck may start wondering just which cosmic gaming god they’ve pissed off.  As has been mentioned before, Kosmos has been shut out of the SdJs since they won for Settlers way back in ‘95; the hex continues.  Rieneck’s Around the World in 80 Days was considered the favorite to win in ‘05 by the majority of SdJ watchers, but it lost to Niagara (and there’s a very vocal group who continues to believe the Jury got that pick wrong).  Now, he can’t even get a nomination.  He’s got a long way to go to rival the Knizia Curse, but it does appear as though he’s gotten more than his share of bad luck.