Ever see the movie Singles? I think that's the one with the scene I'm remembering. Back before Ben Stiller decided to be a clown for his movie career he did some more thoughtful movies like this one. In it, Ben Stiller's character has some trouble with his love life, and decides to just forget about that for a while. I think it's even a girl in the scene with him when he tells her he'd just like to concentrate on work for a year or so. I'm probably off in my memory, but the idea behind that scene always stuck with me. (Okay, not the real idea behind that scene, but what the character literally says.)
You see, I like my job. And why not? It's a really cool job. I wanted to work on spacecraft since I was in grade school when the Apollo moon landings were a recent memory (though, disappointingly, not one I can remember despite being old enough). That's exactly what I do now. Been doing it for 15 years, as a matter of fact, culminating (so far) in my current position--engineering supervisor for mechanisms at JPL. You know, the part of NASA that works on robotic missions. Like Voyager that's left the solar system, Cassini that just arrived at Saturn, and of course the Mars rovers that are still, well, roving around the planet. How cool is that? Pretty damn cool.
Just because the job is cool doesn't mean it isn't still work, though. And for every day filled with the excitement of landing a new spacecraft on another planet there are lots more arguing about budgets and staffing plans. But I never lose sight of how much I enjoy my work. I know everyone isn't so fortunate, and I'd better appreciate what I've got.
So what about this hobby of mine? How does that fit in? Pretty well, but there have been times when I wished I didn't enjoy it so much. I look at some friends that share the hobby, but they just show up on game night to play. They don't have a weblog, they don't follow discussion lists or websites, they don't go out of their way to read Essen previews, and they don't subscribe to Counter magazine. They just play games on Wednesday nights with us and that's it. Sometimes--pretty often, these days--I wish I was the same way. Anyone feel the same? I'm actually dialing back my "rabidness" in the hobby. Have been for a couple years, in fact. I guess I'm on the right track.
...and bad ones I do!
As I've stopped reading boardgame mailing lists, I've been paying a bit more attention to game reviews. Not to determine which games to buy--you'd think that's the main purpose of game reviews, but I'm beginning to think not--but rather just for opinions. And that's the most important part of a review: the opinions. Seems obvious, but there are an awful lot of game reviews out there that spend almost all of their time and text on a general description and rules explanation, with precious little left for real opinions.
Curmudgeon and game show winner Peter Sarrett outlines this with precision in his Review Manifesto. I've written a few reviews myself now, and I know it isn't easy. Actually, writing the description+mechanics sort of reviews are easy. Forming some distinct opinions and trying to back them up with facts, observations, comparisons, or anecdotes is not. Not for me, anyway.
What made me think about this recently were a few reviews written by M. Barnes in the latest Boulder Games newsletter, Game Notes. What I noticed was that I didn't agree with his conclusions or opinions, but they made for good reading (and thinking) just the same. Somewhere along the way I know I've read other reviews that are more aligned with my own opinions . . . but don't make their points well (if they attempt to make points at all). So it's funny--you think a good review would be one that reaches the same conclusions I do, possibly convincing me to buy a game I'd like or avoid one I won't. However, that's not the case at all.
A couple weeks ago we went on a road trip, a family vacation on the road to see more family. My in-laws live about 400 miles north, in Santa Rosa. We used that as a stopover point to continue on another 250 miles or so to Eureka, where my brother and his wife live. (And though this won't impress any readers from Texas, all of this driving was within California!) At first I almost decided not to bring any games, but at the last minute I packed a bag. It quickly turned into a pretty big bag. :-)
Over on the Gamefest weblogs there's one by Greg Schloesser about "evangelizing" our hobby. You can read my comment about that there, too. In a nutshell, I don't begrudge anyone who wants to do that, but I don't care for it myself. I really don't care for anyone who thinks it's something we all should be doing. I'm also bugged by the (closely related, I think) attitude held by some that our hobby is better than others. God forbid anyone should enjoy watching TV!
(Now, some of my friends like Greg are "boardgame evangelists," but they're not the kind that get snooty about the hobby, so I'm okay with that.)
Anyway, so here I am on a family vacation carrying a load of games in the back of the minivan, but I don't think I'm evangelizing. Because I'm not. When part of the trip had us in Santa Rosa joined by two sisters-in-law and their five young kids (four squealing girls--my daughter loved it!), I didn't even suggest a game. Everyone was having enough fun doing other stuff, and I know a game wouldn't have been popular. However, earlier in the week I played a few games with my kids and brother, who enjoy games in moderation. My brother's wife joined in one game, and my wife joined another two the following night. Although I didn't "convert" anyone to be a serious boardgamer like myself, we had fun with the few games we played. That's enough for me.
A few notes about each of the games we played...
Cluzzle -- We didn't really play this so much as let my kids entertain themselves making sculptures. Funny thing, I thought Barbarossa was fun except for the top-heavy game mechanics. The real fun is the sculpting and guessing. Cluzzle seemed to recognize this and distill the game down to just that, but we're finding that even Cluzzle is a bit more game structure than we really want. Just making sculptures and playing 20 Questions with it is about what we do. The actual game and (especially) scoring in Cluzzle will have to wait until I play it with real gamers.
Hick Hack in Gackelwack -- This one has worked with my kids & brother before, so it was a natural pick. It can be a little rough if you don't get your fair share of foxes, but I think there's more to the game than that. It's really about dealing with groupthink.
Ticket to Ride -- I tried this with my brother & his wife, figuring it a good pick for casual gamers. It worked pretty well. I think the strategic heft of the game was about right (i.e., not too much), it looked nice, the subject matter felt immediately familiar, but interestingly it was almost too long of a game. Heck, I play almost nothing but shorter games, but even I was surprised by the different perspective of casual gamers.
Starship Catan -- The next day I had a chance to play something with just my brother Matt. We grew up playing games (from Monopoly to G.E.V. to Champions roleplaying), so I knew he could appreciate the increased complexity, strategy, and theme. He did, too. I'm glad the game didn't last any longer since it bumped right up against the time to start dinner, but it was a success. I know Matt has been a little unimpressed at some of the plain themes of German games I've showed him (e.g. Carcassonne), so this showed him some have a lot more to chew on.
Wings of War -- I ordered this on impulse. Then I had second thoughts and tried to remove it from my order. Too late, and thank goodness for that. It's fun like everyone says. I normally don't care for minatures games, but this is a great little format. Steve Jackson Games ought to license a Car Wars version of the same system. (Actually they should've done that a decade ago, while there was still some life in that game.)
La Strada -- Another purchase I made then later thought twice about, I have some hopes for this as a 2-player game with my wife. As it was, we played 3-player and that worked fine. Funny...what's considered a light game among gamers is one I hope will work as a meatier game for Candy & I. It's all what you're used to, you know. Candy pointed out the same usability issues highlited in Shannon Applecline's review. But I like the board frame, storage insert, and smaller box. Overall a nice little package.
Coloretto -- The buzz wore off on this one, but not for me. I wish we played it much more often. I guess I'll wait for the mini expansion to be made available for free download on designer Michael Schacht's website, but I suspect I'll prefer the game as-is. (BTW, can anyone tell what's on those expansion cards?) When I tried this once before with family it bombed, so I'm glad it went over well enough now. Though again, it's an interesting wake-up call for playing with casual gamers: my brother commented on how you have to really watch everyone else's position, you can't just play your own game. That goes without saying among experienced gamers (not just boardgamers...certainly Bridge and poker players understand this concept!), but there it was with my intelligent brother. Something to remember for future family outings.
Even though the Spiel des Jahres is the award that counts, I still participate in the DSP voting ever since they made it easy for us foreigners to participate over the Internet. Mik Svellov has been facilitating that process for non-German speakers for just as long. Doesn't that just make the DSP a popularity contest, which the sales figures probably do already? Yeah, that's probably true, but I don't mind. Moreover, I often find that while the top game might be a forgone conclusion, the others receiving top ten voting may be interesting, even turning up something that hasn't had as much attention in the English-speaking world. Also, once Mik shares the voting totals it's fun to see the distribution, whether this year has a runaway favorite or several close games in the final voting.
Well, fun for boardgame geeks, anyway. :-)
Going through the process also highlites why this isn't the best one for picking THE best game. I play a lot of games (admittedly, not as many of the newest ones as I used do), and there are lots I've only played once, possibly with errors in the rules. There are lots more I haven't EVER tried and some I've never even heard of.
But who cares? Just vote for the fun of it.
You can probably do the same thing on Boardgamegeek somehow, but I use Luding for the lists of eligible games (released on or about Essen 2003 and Nuremberg 2004). Though the voting takes place at a German site, you'll want to go to Mik's page that walks you through the simple process.
I voted for Hansa, St. Petersberg, Die Fugger, Iglu Pop, and Wings of War. Just missing the cut were San Juan, Ticket to Ride, and Santiago.
Long time no write. I'm trying hard not to apologize for that. I don't follow the boardgaming mailing lists any more, have never been able to keep my website maintained, yet I still want to share some thoughts now & then. A weblog with RSS feed should be the best format for these irregular writings, yet I still feel a bit sheepish about writing so infrequently. Then again, I know I follow some other weblogs that publish new material only once in a while. And when they do, I'm pleased as punch to read it--it doesn't matter if it's been a while since the last entry.
As it happens, I've got several things on my mind right now. Might as well jot them down, right?
The Spiel des Jahres came & went. Even though it doesn't affect MY game selections, it affects my hobby. All for the better, as far as I'm concerned. The fact that I prefer lighter games means my own tastes are similar to that of the family-focussed selection committee (jury). More than that, the award is successful--it brings greater awareness, profitable results, and promotes continued quality in the games (both gameplay and physical production). It does this without being a popularity contest, simply picking a game that's already winning at the cash register. In fact, the robustness of the entire hobby/industry in Germany--the goal for hobbyists in other countries--is due to the Spiel des Jahres. (Okay, and Essen.)
This year I didn't follow the award closely, didn't play and can't remember the other nominees. But I hoped Ticket To Ride would win, and had bought my copy already. I think St. Petersburg would've been a good pick, too . . . if not for the paper money. That really bugs me--it's in several recent games, and a few years ago I bet it would've been coin tokens instead. Seems to me we've seen a gradual slide of coin tokens made from wood, to plastic, to cardboard, to (ugh) paper money. Part of the delight of German boardgames are the attractive components. Or used to be. Ticket to Ride is still nice. So is Maharaja.
P.S. Is the AvantGo feed still working? Last time I checked on my own PDA it had stopped synching the main content of this blog. Grr...