The Great Comment Rewrite
In January 2016 I decided to bring my older comments to the same level with the late ones, i.e., make them more useful by giving fair criticism and by explaining why a game is good or bad instead of just stating 'I like this'. Having several hundred comments to rewrite, this will take a long time but I'll tackle the task bit by bit.The Great Rating Renewal
After five years on BGG and a few hundred titles played, I had a look at my ratings and felt that they weren't true. The main reason being that some newer games have set the new standard and hence a 10 from five years ago simply is not the same as a 10 from today. Of course, I've grown as a gamer and my personal taste has become somewhat finer.
As of Jan 2013, I've given new ratings to all titles but preserved the original ratings in the comments if there has been a change. The average rating shifted downwards approximately by 0.10 points while some titles actually got a higher score.
I try to follow the BGG descriptions when rating games. As a rule of thumb you can use the following to decipher my ratings:10-6I'll play willingly. The higher a rating, the higher contents/length ratio the game usually has. To me contents translates to meaningful decisions where you agonize over trade-offs between two or more things you want to accomplish. Futhermore, intuitive rules that represent the theme are a plus. I am also a sucker for beautiful art, which of course is subject to my personal taste and is beyond describing.5I'll play if there's no alternative. I find the game complete and basically there are no major flaws in the design. It is usually the contents vs. length ratio, cluttered and overly complicated rules or scripted gameplay that separate FIVEs from higher ratings.4-2I consider the game clearly poorly designed or having annoying qualities to it. It may be e.g. flaws in playability, rules that need fixing, incomprehensible rulebook or lack of decision making of any kind. It will take some bribing and negotiation skills to get me play.1I'll simply refuse to play. Either the game is broken beyond fixing or it is extremely annoying. The latter is usually a combination of a loooong playing time and zero decisions to be made.History
Illuminati Deluxe Edition was my introduction to "modern" boardgaming. Soon after that came the three big C
s, i.e., Catan, Carcassonne and Caylus. I have played all those games for countless of hours with my friends.
Of course we played many other games also as we ventured deeper into the world of boardgames. We tried pretty much everything we could get into our hands. I think that this has been an important part of the journey. You cannot judge anything before you've tried it yourself.
My first signs of geekiness showed up when I joined the Finnish Boardgaming Society a few of years later. After that my own collection started getting bigger and bigger until recently I began fine tuning it by getting rid of the games I do not play that often.
Now we are conveniently talking about my game taste. A good game offers tight and meaningful decisions. Great games add something special into the mix or perform certain things extraordinary well. That could be beautiful artwork, clever mechanics, or an interesting theme. But to be really outstanding, a game has to provoke some feelings also. I want feel bad after losing, and find triumph in victory.
I like both, testing new games and playing familiar ones but I reckon the latter one gives me more satisfaction. Tight games against experienced opponents are usually the most memorable of plays.Milestones
100 ratings - May 2009
200 ratings - May 2010
300 ratings - Sep 2012
400 ratings - Aug 2014
500 ratings - Nov 2015
Check these out:ReviewsSession reportsGeeklistsMicrobadge designs: