Laughing and crying baby heads?  Hmmm...does this have something to do with the current state of the Martin household?

So much to talk about here:

1.  What I admire most about Eric’s reviews are that they are honest, pull no punches and are fair-minded.  I’ll read a BGN review by Eric before almost anyone else.  The last review on Letter Roll was great and affirms that Eric’s reviews are ones I can trust.

2.  I do disagree with Eric’s assertion that readers ignored the substance of Levy’s game critiques.  There was focus on the number for what it represented.  I believe our readers DO realize that if a person play fifteen games, it is easily within the realm of possibility that most will only be okay.  Most people equate that to a number rating less than 7.  The substance of Larry’s critique backed up his number ratings and asserted that the vast majority of the games were *good*.  That is different than *okay*.  And the other issue was how do you differentiate a low 7, mid 7 and high 7?  I do agree with Eric that a different rating system than a 10 point scale is a sound idea.

3. Game Reviews:  Here’s the management side coming out in me… Just a suggestion Eric.  As *editor* of BGN, you have a full writing staff at your disposal… with varying tastes in games.  Why not leverage that so you are not writing all of the reviews?  Volunteer basis, of course. But at least then you wouldn’t have a backlog of reviews from 2006 that probably deserve a fair hearing.

Thanks for the comment, Ryan. The paradox of rating systems is that a more differentiated scale introduces accuracy at the expense of understanding. I’ve read Roger Ebert’s explanation for the thumb’s up/thumb’s down rating system – a system that couldn’t be simpler – and think that’s an interesting approach as it conveys basic information to the reader ("play" or “don’t play"), while still requiring him to read the review in order to learn anything more meaningful about the game in question. You would then avoid meaningless quibbling between “good,” “okay,” and other such terms which are used in the BGG rating system.

I have farmed party games to outside reviewers in the past, but doing so sometimes introduces management issues as I must then follow up on the reviewers multiple times to check on their progress, which defeats the purpose of outsourcing such reviews. Dale has done a good job of taking on any sports games presented to me, and I appreciate him going where I never could!

In general, I never promise a review within a certain period of time and make that clear to publishers before they send me anything. The only thing I do promise is to review the game honestly when I do get around to it.

Eric

I definitely agree with what you are saying about rating systems.  Well-put.

Forget the baby heads and other numerical systems. Your reasons for not using them are compelling.

Your approach requires a serious reader to actually read your comments.

Although I am a “theme” person, I enjoy your reviews specifically for the mechanics, what works and doesn’t work, the player interaction (or lack of), and other elements. I can decide for myself whether I like the theme or want to avoid it, but I need the other information to decide whether I should seriously consider purchasing a game.

And, I am a member of the “New-to-Me” cult, so I am interested in reviews of games published in previous years, as much as the new releases.

Keep up the good work, and don’t compromise your system for the sake of novelty or humor.

Hailing from the same newspaper-reading area, I share your fondness for the little chair dweller.  I think, though, that I would probably read fewer reviews if his baby-headed likeness were to make appearances.  Absent any gauge, I find my natural curiosity drives me to determine what you, whose opinion I trust, think of a game.

Your work--as well as Larry’s and the others’--is eagerly anticipated here, regardless.

I do appreciate Eric’s honesty in reviewing the games the way he sees them and experiences them. I have enjoyed our relationship over the years writing for BGN and sending preview information, and I completely trust Eric to say what he really thinks when reviewing one of my games, regardless.  That’s what a real friend would do, right?  Harsh criticism might sting a little, but then again, it might motivate a designer more for the next effort (cue Rocky theme music).

Eric, it might be good, however, for you to explain more how you choose your games to be reviewed, considering you have such a backlog.  You seem to focus more on games from small publishers that are not yet as well-known, or on games that have not received much buzz.  In fact, there haven’t been very many good reviews from your end in awhile.  Is there a particulat niche you are trying to fill with your game selection?

The backlog results from two things: One, receiving lots of unsolicited games, and two, playing mediocre games once or twice, then setting them aside without playing them enough times to review, thereby forgetting everything that I learned from my initial plays, which then requires me to bring them to the table again when no one else is interested in playing such titles due to their first experiences or game group buzz!

The recent spate of reviews of less-than-memorable games results from a concerted effort to fulfill my obligations as a reviewer and reclaim space in my game room rather than letting titles sit for months and years. Unlike wine, games don’t necessarily get better when they age, so my best approach is to keep pushing a title to the table until I can write about it. After doing so, that’s one less title to get to at some point in the future, and I can move on to something else.

I do tend to focus on games from smaller publishers or first-time designers when considering which games to review. (I also am constricted by needing different numbers of players to play a game with me multiple times in order to have a better perspective on the game.) Many other BGN columnists will write about the latest alea game, the latest Rio Grande release, and so forth, so why not shine a light on smaller publishers? The results aren’t uniformly (or even mostly) good, but you do discover little known games like Day & Night that would otherwise be overlooked and it feels good to share such finds with others.

My larger goal, as always, is to have more people playing games that they enjoy, whether or not I enjoy those games as well, as I think that playing games is a good thing, both socially and intellectually, and I’d prefer that game-playing be a more widespread activity among the populace at large. After all, the more gamers in the world, the greater the chance of me finding opponents willing to play!

Eric

I think that a game review is like any other product reviews. If you want it to be usefull you also have to point out what you think are the bad things, so people can see the whole picture. As stated by Eric, some people will not care about those negative issues and will still like the product.
Too many times reviewers do not want to “harm” the desginer of the game and do not point out what they consider are the weak spot of the game. I think that their review actually suffers from this strategy and the outcome is that gamers who buy games based on those reviews also suffer.

One question still interests me: How do you decide which game to review?

Eric, I enjoy your reviews.  The only thing I would like to see is a single-sentence summary of the review in the header information.  I think this would be very useful.

Gilad, I realized only now that I didn’t answer your question. Many factors combine to determine which games I’ll review: how many times have I played the game with what types of players and how many different players; how confident do I feel in what I have to say; do I have something to say in the first place.

As for which games I play in preparation for writing a review, that’s a whole ‘nother story as it depends on how many people I have at the table, what types of games they like, how interested I am in playing the game, how well I know the rules and how comfortable I am teaching them, and what I want to play at that moment. I don’t try to bias in favor of games, but I do try to keep from biasing against them. For example, I know that certain people I game with hate bluffing games, so their taste would likely sour the experience of playing a bluff-heavy games for others. Some folks have trouble with rules that lots of exceptions, games with a pattern-recognition element, and so on. I want to give a game a fair shake, so I’ll choose some other game if such a person is at the table. I have plenty of games from which to choose, after all…

Eric