Julie DuBois
United States
Redmond
Washington
-
Wow, thanks for posting this so quickly!
But...Indonesia didn't make the cut. 
(perhaps next year there'll be a small publisher category?)
Lots of fun though, regardless of the outcome.
Edit: How many users voted?
-
oskari
Finland
Helsinki
corals... yummy!
I'm a blood-sucking fiend! Look at my outfit!
-
How is Twilight Struggle both a wargame and a non-wargame?
-
Björn Hansson
Sweden
Jakobsberg
-
oskari wrote: How is Twilight Struggle both a wargame and a non-wargame?
That is a VERY good question. 
-
Matthew M Monin
United States
Branford
Connecticut
8/8 FREE, PROTECTED
That guy
-
My guess...some people nominated it for one, some for another, some for neither, and some for both. Whatever combination was most prevalent, it got enough nominations to appear on both lists.
As for how many people submit nominations, I don't have any exact numbers (I'm sure Aldie will provide those eventually) but I'm reasonably certain it was over 500.
-MMM
-
Marc Kob
United States
Pennsylvania
-
I think I may have to turn in my geek certification. I've only played three of the nominees. Ingenious, Niagara and Star Wars Attacktix
Gee, I actually used to think of myself as a well rounded gamer...
-
Hans Persson
Sweden
Linköping
Unspecified
-
Moon Knight wrote: I think I may have to turn in my geek certification. I've only played three of the nominees. Ingenious, Niagara and Star Wars Attacktix Gee, I actually used to think of myself as a well rounded gamer...
Hey, that's three times as many as I've played (only Caylus)...
-
Danny Webb
United States
Whitesburg
Kentucky
-
Cool to see Sleeping Queens on the list. It is my daughter's favorite game of the year for sure, and I have had a good time playing it with her. It will likely end up my most played game of the year.
-
June King
United States
Unspecified
Bring me her heart in this box.
-
Hey! That's My Fish isn't a strictly a two-player game. You can play with up to four.
-
Robert Zurfluh
United States
Cranbury
New Jersey
-
This is like the Oscars.....Hey! That's my Fish is leading the nominations, but will it win anything in the end?
-
JonMichael Rasmus
United States
Madison
Wisconsin
-
Let the BG4* speculation begin! Me, I'm gonna retreat into some stats.
*BG4 = Board Game Geek Golden Geek
-
Chaddyboy
United States
Olathe
Kansas
Bloooooop.
Bluuuuuurp.
-
These lists look pretty good! The only one I wouldn't agree with is Shadows Over Camelot as a gamers game.
I also thought it amusing that Niagara, a SdJ winner, was nominated as a kids game!
-
Randy Cox
United States
Clemson
South Carolina
1024x768 works just fine - Don't Wide the Site!
The Back Alley gets no respect.
-
The main issue I see (other than Twilight Struggle being a wargame by the masses and apparently not a wargame by the grognards) is the Light/Party grouping...
It's easy enough to nominate games into such a list, but when the actual voting comes to be, we'll be asked to rank games in that grouping. How do you really estabilish a ranked list comparing a light press-your-luck game (Diamant) to a light cooperative bad game (Shadows over Camelot) to a real live party game (Wits & Wagers). I think the results will come down to whether there are more "gamer gamers" voting (who would go for a light strategy game) or more "family gamers" voting (who would probably go for the Diamants of the world) or more "RPGers" voting (Camelot) or more "party gamers" voting (Wits & Wagers). I fear that party gamers are the small group here.  But it will be interesting.
-
Tom Rosen
United States
Arlington
Virginia
-
Ludocrazy wrote: Hey! That's My Fish isn't a strictly a two-player game. You can play with up to four.
Some people asked about this in the original thread, and I believe Aldie said that games didn't have to be strictly two-player games in order to be up for the Two-Player Game category, they just had to play particularly well with 2 players. This is why I also nominated games like Caylus and Louis XIV for the Two-Player Game category. By the way, Ingenious is also up for the Two-Player Game award and plays with up to 4 people.
---
Looks like a great list, although I was also interested to see that Twilight Struggle is both a wargame and a non-wargame, but then again that's not too surprising as I'm sure public opinion on BGG would be pretty evenly split over the question of whether TS is a wargame. It'll certainly be interesting if it wins both.
I was amazed to see I'd actually played 22 of the nominees, and they weren't a bad crop of games, especially the ones I've bolded:
Caylus
Hacienda
Louis XIV
Reef Encounter
Thurn and Taxis
Ticket to Ride - Märklin Edition
Twilight Imperium 3rd Edition
Dungeon Twister
Fjords
Hey! That's My Fish!
Ingenious
Lord of the Rings - The Confrontation: Deluxe Edition
Rat Hot
Travel Blokus
Twilight Struggle
Diamant
That's Life!
Tsuro
Um Krone und Kragen
Wits & Wagers
Niagara
Ticket to Ride Europe
---
Randy Cox wrote: The main issue I see ... It's easy enough to nominate games into such a list, but when the actual voting comes to be, we'll be asked to rank games in that grouping. How do you really estabilish a ranked list comparing a light press-your-luck game (Diamant) to a light cooperative bad game (Shadows over Camelot) to a real live party game (Wits & Wagers). I think the results will come down to whether there are more "gamer gamers" voting (who would go for a light strategy game) or more "family gamers" voting (who would probably go for the Diamants of the world) or more "RPGers" voting (Camelot) or more "party gamers" voting (Wits & Wagers). I fear that party gamers are the small group here. But it will be interesting.
I see what you're saying, but personally I'm definitely going with Wits & Wagers because it's more true to the category as I see it than some of the other games, even other games that I think are better and would rather play, namely Hey That's My Fish. I nominated Fish for every category so that it would have as good a chance as winning as possible, and because it doesn't really fit into any category very well, but Wits & Wagers is just such a perfect game for this category, and such a clever game by a small publisher, and a BGGer to boot, that I think it deserves the first annual Golden Geek. There are plenty of other good games in there of course though, and some I'd really love to try, namely Ca$h'n Gun$, but I'm hoping people focus on the Party aspect of the category rather than the Light aspect because the Family Game category essentially covers the Light games already.
-
Ray
United States
Carpentersville
Illinois
-
Aldie,
Any chance we could see the 5 or 10 games that barely missed making the list?
-
Brendan Tracey
United States
Unspecified
-
I (sadly) have not played a lot of games on the list. However, since we're using the ranked pairs method, if I think that a) is better than b), I should still vote because it won't really effect the outcome of the other games, correct?
-
Jefferson Delugachecci
United States
Waukegan
Illinois
-
Do you think that next year, a game should only be allowed to appear in a single category? Maybe if it is fortunate enough to be in two categories, it will only appear in the category if performed stronger in during the nomination process . . .
-
A L D A R O N
United States
Boston
Massachusetts
A L D A R O N
-} 1 {-
-
wtrollkin2000 wrote: Aldie,
Any chance we could see the 5 or 10 games that barely missed making the list?
Was there a lot of participation in the voting for nominations? There's something wrong with these lists that I can't quite put my finger on.
-
-
If the vote doesn't corresponse with the BGG game ranks, then one wonders how valid a vote it is. For example, if Hacienda wins the BGG "gamers game" award, then shouldn't it be ranked higher than Caylus on BGG? (Realizing, of course, that only those who've paid to vote get to vote, which . . . I dunno . . . hard to say that the winner has been chosen by Board Game Geek, when in fact it's been chosen by only a small (and perhaps not representative) sampling of BGG users.)
I thought this was a good idea at first. Now it seems that it's unnecessary. BGG has already chosen its winners in each category. Just look to see which is the highest ranked game in that category. 
-
Jeff M
United States
Winter Park
Florida
-
How do I go back and see the games I nominated so I can compare it to the ones that got the final nod? http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geekawards.php simply says "Nominations are now closed for 2006". I was hoping we could still see our lists, just that they would be readonly now.
-
Matthew M Monin
United States
Branford
Connecticut
8/8 FREE, PROTECTED
That guy
-
Aldaron wrote:
Was there a lot of participation in the voting for nominations? There's something wrong with these lists that I can't quite put my finger on.
I suppose it depends on what you would consider "a lot". I don't have exact figures for how many total participants there were, but I do know that it was well over 500.
In the Gamer's Game category the lowest qualifying game still received over 100 nominations. Family Game was the next most active category.
The Kid's Game category had the least activity, with the number of nominations for the qualifiers ranging from 10 to about 50. All other categories had top qualifiers that exceeded 150 nominations, and in several instances were closer to 300+ for the top qualifier.
-MMM
-
A L D A R O N
United States
Boston
Massachusetts
A L D A R O N
-} 1 {-
-
Octavian wrote: Aldaron wrote: Was there a lot of participation in the voting for nominations? There's something wrong with these lists that I can't quite put my finger on. I suppose it depends on what you would consider "a lot". I don't have exact figures for how many total participants there were, but I do know that it was well over 500.
For a community this size, that's not a lot.
Drew1365 wrote: I thought this was a good idea at first. Now it seems that it's unnecessary. BGG has already chosen its winners in each category.
Agreed!
-
-
Aldaron wrote: Octavian wrote: Aldaron wrote: Was there a lot of participation in the voting for nominations? There's something wrong with these lists that I can't quite put my finger on. I suppose it depends on what you would consider "a lot". I don't have exact figures for how many total participants there were, but I do know that it was well over 500. For a community this size, that's not a lot. Drew1365 wrote: I thought this was a good idea at first. Now it seems that it's unnecessary. BGG has already chosen its winners in each category. Agreed!
I agree on both comments.
-
JonMichael Rasmus
United States
Madison
Wisconsin
-
Aldaron wrote: Drew1365 wrote: I thought this was a good idea at first. Now it seems that it's unnecessary. BGG has already chosen its winners in each category. Agreed!
That's not necessarily true either. Let's say that we have three games: Key West, Festys, and Mississippi & Missouri with 100 ratings
50 people have ranked the games:
Key West 8.5
Festys 8.0
M & M 7.5
30 people have ranked the games:
Festys 9.0
Key West 6.5
M & M 6.0
and
20 people have ranked the games:
M & M 9.0
Key West 8.5
Festys 6.5
The average ratings would show that:
Festys 8.0
Key West 7.9
M & M 7.35
but Key West would win in most voting arrangements. (In the BGG example, KW beats Festys 70 times. Festys beats M & M 80 times and KW beats M & M 80 times. So Key West would be the winner if these people were the electorate.)
-
A L D A R O N
United States
Boston
Massachusetts
A L D A R O N
-} 1 {-
-
jmsr525 wrote: Let's say that [...] average ratings would show that:
Festys 8.0
Key West 7.9
M & M 7.35
but [under certain assumptions] Key West would win in most voting arrangements.
This just illustrates a problem with many voting arrangements, especially in a case like the one you use in your example.
-
|
|
