First, entertainment in general has trended towards ever greater eye candy, which is basically what we mean when we say "thematic" on BGG. People like eye candy. It sells computers, tablets, movies (3D anyone?), and video games. Why shouldn't that carry over to board games as well.

The "Growth in Quality" may simply reflect the cult of the new. Newer games tend to get higher rankings than older games.

As for the quantity side of the analysis, I would also blame Fantasy Flight, who's really shown everybody else how to do it.

I disagree that thematic just means eye candy. To me that means a thematic game is simply a eurogame with better components. It's a lot deeper than that. It's more a case of with euros the mechanics are the driving force of the game and the theme is fit around the mechanics which are the backbone of the game. With a thematic game the theme is the backbone and the mechanics are fit around the theme.

In my mind a thematic game or Ameritrash if you wish are as different from a euro as a wargame is. There are always gray areas I know but the three game types are in my mind very different.

The major factor represented by games in the Thematic section seems to be production values. If not, then why is "War of the Ring the Collector's Edition" ranked higher than just the "War of the Ring" game.

In fact, for most of those games, the fancy production values are completely arbitrary. "War of the Ring" could have been designed as a 4x "War of Battlestar Galactica" and Battlestar Galactica could have been about "The Fellowship of the Ring" to see who would betray Frodo.

The major factor represented by games in the Thematic section seems to be production values. If not, then why is "War of the Ring the Collector's Edition" ranked higher than just the "War of the Ring" game. If Chrome doesn't count, then they should be the same game and not differentiated. The fact that they are--and that it's enough to push them to the top--suggests that eye candy is everything.

That's easy.
1) It's much more useable. While 'painted figures' could be described as simply 'chrome', anyone who has played WoTR know that the painted figures makes the game easier to play; the original comes with all the different factions having the same colors making it a useability mess. Combine that with a larger board and easier to read cards and the game becomes more enjoyable due to ease of use, not chrome.

2) It's not the same game. It has the expansion elements included, which is generally regarded as making the game better. Therefore it only makes sense that the version of the game which has superior gameplay be rated higher.

3) It's expensive and limited, therefore most people who rate it are already fans of the game. The standard version will therefore have more lower votes from people who don't like the game. This is a quirk of ratings, since it's not just the same people rating each version.

There, 3 reasons why the ratings are different which have nothing to do with chrome. BTW you are using "Chrome" incorrectly here anyway.



If that were the case the game would have ended up totally different.

For that matter, why isn't Twilight Struggle ranked in there? It's got theme. Oh, that's right. It comes with a folded paper map and little cardboard counters. You can't have "theme" with cardboard. In fact, come to mention it, why aren't lots of the wargames in there. Wilderness War? Washington's War? Hannibal: Rome vs. Carthage? Those all have theme out the wazoo. Or are they just wargames? In which case, shouldn't War of the Ring be disqualified too?

Because 'thematic game' does not mean 'game which has a theme' any more than 'wargame' means 'game about war'. They're each terms of art, whose precise meaning cannot be determined simply by analysis of their component parts. Compare to 'malice aforethought' in criminal common law.

So, you're telling me that a black and white version of War of the Ring with cardboard counters that cost $25 would be ranked just as high as the Collector's Edition, provided it was usable. I doubt it.

You take any of the games ranked at the top of the "Thematic" category and release them with Twilight Struggle production values and their rank would drop like a rock. The game might be just as fun, but that's not what drives the rankings in that section.

For that matter, why isn't Twilight Struggle ranked in there? It's got theme. Oh, that's right. It comes with a folded paper map and little cardboard counters. You can't have "theme" with cardboard. In fact, come to mention it, why aren't lots of the wargames in there. Wilderness War? Washington's War? Hannibal: Rome vs. Carthage? Those all have theme out the wazoo. Or are they just wargames? In which case, shouldn't War of the Ring be disqualified too?

Why does WotR get the top spot and Twilight Struggle doesn't even get included?

Yes.
May even be rated higher as the original has useability issues. Some people switched the figures out for cubes for example (proof in the WotR gallery.



Could I have some proof of this? 'Cause frankly I think you are talking out of your ass.

The major factor represented by games in the Thematic section seems to be production values. If not, then why is "War of the Ring the Collector's Edition" ranked higher than just the "War of the Ring" game. If Chrome doesn't count, then they should be the same game and not differentiated. The fact that they are--and that it's enough to push them to the top--suggests that eye candy is everything.

I couldn't agree more about thematic, which is exactly what I've been arguing. Theme has very little to do with ranking in the "thematic" category or the rise in popularity of "thematic" games.

On the other hand, I'm not so sure that "wargame" can't be parsed correctly. Wargames are games about war. Cold War. War on Terror. World War II. Second Punic War. Revolutionary War. Some theorized future space war or fantasy war. Etc...

Which finally leaves me wondering if your malice aforethought reference was meant to convey that it could be parsed as the premeditation element in first degree murder or an impossible to define term, in which case all those Black's Law Dictionaries ought to be returned.

If that were the case the game would have ended up totally different.

The major factor represented by games in the Thematic section seems to be production values. If not, then why is "War of the Ring the Collector's Edition" ranked higher than just the "War of the Ring" game. If Chrome doesn't count, then they should be the same game and not differentiated. The fact that they are--and that it's enough to push them to the top--suggests that eye candy is everything.

In fact, for most of those games, the fancy production values are completely arbitrary. "War of the Ring" could have been designed as a 4x "War of Battlestar Galactica" and Battlestar Galactica could have been about "The Fellowship of the Ring" to see who would betray Frodo.

Climbing the ranks in the thematic section is like following a progression in ever better artwork and miniature design.

I actually prefer chrome, so what I'm saying shouldn't be taken as a criticism.

For the most part, Clay, I agree with you. However, in the particular case of WotR, I believe the significantly larger board (and, to a lesser degree, the larger cards) is partly responsible for the higher rating vs. original/standard edition. The larger board was actually the "tilting factor" in my decision to buy the CE.

I would bet on the intersection of two factors driving this trend.

First, entertainment in general has trended towards ever greater eye candy, which is basically what we mean when we say "thematic" on BGG. People like eye candy. It sells computers, tablets, movies (3D anyone?), and video games. Why shouldn't that carry over to board games as well.

Eye Candy sells.

Second, the board game industry is microscopic next to video game or movie productions. Budgets are comparatively minuscule. When was the last time a board game got budgeted at 100 million?

Small budgets restricted what board game designers could reasonably produce. However, the rise of incredibly powerful, but also incredibly cheap home computers has placed high quality graphic design within the reach of anyone with a semi-decent computer and an internet connection. I don't know, but I'm guessing the printing industry has made color printing cheaper too. (My inkjet sure beats the old dot matrix printers) We are seeing the benefits of this availability reach the board game industry.

Bottom Line: Eye candy sells and now it's cheap to produce. Just look at some of the user mods here at the Geek. Anybody with talent and a computer can produce a masterpiece!



(Edit: Steven makes a good point about market size; however, I suspect that's a consequence of better production--not a driver. Still, it's a bit of a chicken-and-egg type problem with each reinforcing the other. Certainly, as more people buy games and more companies get into the board game business, the competition should drive quality higher)