Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
19 Posts

Boss Monster: The Dungeon Building Card Game» Forums » General

Subject: Does anyone else notice . . . rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Michael Schwerdtfeger
United States
Redondo Beach
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
. . . how many non-avatared users rate this game a 9 or 10?

I'm not necessarily suggesting anything improper, but this volume of high ratings by a disproportionately inactive user group always makes me wonder.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Drew Hicks
United States
Raleigh
North Carolina
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Waylander1 wrote:
. . . how many non-avatared users rate this game a 9 or 10?

I'm not necessarily suggesting anything improper, but this volume of high ratings by a disproportionately inactive user group always makes me wonder.



I don't think this game is targeted at the kind of user who would use this site enough to earn the GG for an avatar.

I think it's got a high rating for the same reason that Twilight Struggle is #1... self-selection, or in TS' case, selection bias. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selection_bias

People that wouldn't like Twilight Struggle are unlikely to buy it because of its presentation, and therefore unlikely to be disappointed.

People that like Boss Monster are unlikely to have much in common with the active community on BGG in terms of taste in games. They self-select OUT of the community, and therefore they'd be unlikely to earn GG if even if they did, unlikely to spend it on avatars. If you compare with Munchkin you will see a similar effect.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Schwerdtfeger
United States
Redondo Beach
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
AnEvenWeirderMove wrote:


I don't think this game is targeted at the kind of user who would use this site enough to earn the GG for an avatar.


So they only come to BGG to rate Munchkin and Boss Monster? Doesn't that sound odd in and of itself? Not interested in using BGG, but they'll come in droves to BGG to rate a relatively crappy game?

While I'm not going to do it, it would be interesting to know how many games average 9 and 10 rater of this game has rated.

Now that I think about it, maybe there should be a weighting to rankings based on how many games people have rated. I care more about what experienced gamers say about a game than people that have only played Munchkin (and Boss Monster).

There are plenty of games of this genre that don't have a lot of high ratings on BGG. It seems like someone did a lot of work to get people that apparently don't use BGG much to rate a game.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Schwerdtfeger
United States
Redondo Beach
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Waylander1 wrote:


So they only come to BGG to rate Munchkin and Boss Monster? Doesn't that sound odd in and of itself? Not interested in using BGG, but they'll come in droves to BGG to rate a relatively crappy game?

While I'm not going to do it, it would be interesting to know how many games average 9 and 10 rater of this game has rated.


OK. You made me look. I am shocked that these folks have generally rated a lot more games than I would have thought they would have. Mostly in the several 10s of games. I really expected a bunch of 1-5 rating kind of folks. While there were some, they were the minority.

So, I suppose I withdraw my otherwise snarky sounding post.

I'll be honest, I'm still surprised that this game attracts as high a rating as it does. But, I guess it truly does have a bigger audience than I'd expect. It seems that it really does take all kinds.

One last comment - if I were a designer, I'd try to come up with a Race for the Galaxy/Glory to Rome/etc. quality game with a really geeky Munchkin-like theme. I think it would bridge the gap to really bringing new people into the hobby!!
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Wesley M
United States
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
Greatest Game Ever
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Nostalgia is probably what nets it the rating it has.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ethan
United States
Tucson
Arizona
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
As a non-avatar user I find your statements biased. I'm glad that with some further research you found some reasoning to help explain what you felt was an anomaly.

Though I do not have an avatar I consider myself an active user of BGG. I post, infrequently, where I think I have something of value to add. And I don't have any immediate plans to add an avatar to my profile if I have geek gold or not. I mostly "lurk" reading geeklists and reviews. Checking information on new games coming out and following the ones in my own collection. I'm monitoring for interesting variants, rules questions I haven't encountered yet, or some of the amazing things people upload that I can use to enhance my gaming experience.

You will see that I have a microbadge for Boss Monster because I enjoy the game and it was one I felt like people should check out. However, you will also see I have only rated the game a 7. It's not perfect in my opinion.

Waylander1 wrote:

So they only come to BGG to rate Munchkin and Boss Monster? Doesn't that sound odd in and of itself? Not interested in using BGG, but they'll come in droves to BGG to rate a relatively crappy game?

What you feel is a crappy game is your opinion. Others obviously do not share that opinion.

Waylander1 wrote:

Now that I think about it, maybe there should be a weighting to rankings based on how many games people have rated. I care more about what experienced gamers say about a game than people that have only played Munchkin (and Boss Monster).

I hope this never happens. People like games for different reasons. And different people are looking for different experiences in a game. As you could probably tell by looking at my rankings I look for theme and a generally fun experience playing with others.

While I can acknowledge the impressive mechanics and thought put into games like La Havre and Powergrid I will never rank games like them highly because I personally just don't enjoy them. However, I can perfectly understand those that do and I can see what it is that they enjoy about them.

I don't think that person A, who has rated a lot of board games, should have more influence then person B, who has not. I think that this would either make people not participate in the system or lie to get their way in.

Even if a game like Munchkin is not full of innovative mechanics, extensive decision making, or whatever you deem needed to make a great game, you would be hard pressed to say it is not a extremely successful game. It also probably helps lead the masses to trying out the games that you think they should like instead.

Waylander1 wrote:

There are plenty of games of this genre that don't have a lot of high ratings on BGG. It seems like someone did a lot of work to get people that apparently don't use BGG much to rate a game.

I think this may have to do with this game being a successful kickstarter game. I have noticed this often results in people rating before they try based on hype or how they feel the game is going to be based on the kickstarter information they have. It would be interesting if we could track when people have rated something to see if it changes overtime.


The only rankings I've found to be very helpful are extremely low ones. If it's a stinker for everyone I probably don't want to invest money into it. Otherwise, you might just need the right audience to appreciate the game. Personally I'd still try it once if someone wanted to bring it to the table. I just wouldn't seek it out on my own.

Lastly, I think what you ended up doing is the best. Take a look at what else people have rated. Just like movie or book reviewers it's best to have a relationship of sorts with them. You get a good idea of the types of things they like and how that compares to the types of things you like. I think this will give you the best idea of if a game will be for you or not.

*edit: I just noticed that ratings are actually assigned a month/year. Aha!
16 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ian Toltz
United States
Boston
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
Your cat likes me more
badge
In brightest day / In blackest night / No evil shall escape my sight / Let those who worship evil's might / Beware my power--Green Lantern's light!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Does anyone else notice...

...how often people complain about ratings?

Who are these people that are ever looking at who gives ratings in the first place?

The ratings are entirely meaningless. Ignore them and carry on.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matthew Hovland
United States
Santa Clarita
CA
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Amen
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nick Hayes
United States
Los Angeles
California
flag msg tools
designer
badge
"Gargoyle's Quest" Gameboy, 1990
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Waylander1 wrote:
I care more about what experienced gamers say about a game than people that have only played Munchkin (and Boss Monster).

I know you've already sort of apologized for the post I'm quoting so take this with a grain of salt, but I'd like to use this opportunity to point out that just because a user does not have an avatar, or is maybe even a new user, does not mean that he or she is not an experienced gamer.
9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Schwerdtfeger
United States
Redondo Beach
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Asmor wrote:
Does anyone else notice...

...how often people complain about ratings?

Who are these people that are ever looking at who gives ratings in the first place?

The ratings are entirely meaningless. Ignore them and carry on.


With the deluge of games coming out today, it is no longer possible even to try even a small fraction of them. So, to me, ratings are important in understanding what I want to play. Usually, games that have as many ratings as Boss Monster does at the relatively high levels it does are games that catch my attention to give a try.

So, when there is a huge disconnect between the ratings and what I thought about the game, I try to think about it for a few minutes to make sure I don't make the same mistake again in the future.

Drakenfyre wrote:
As a non-avatar user I find your statements biased.


Fair enough, but I've found that with the avalanche of Kickstarter games and the pre-ratings based on Kickstarter hype that you mention, I find that raters that have avatars (particularly the ones that add a thoughtful comment about the game) are the ones that I can most rely on. When I see a lot of high ratings without comments on games (like here), I question the meaning of those ratings and I usually skip over the game.

I don't particularly care about the ratings except that I use them to help me figure out what I might be interested in. In this case, I was particularly surprised by the disconnect.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Donn Hardy
United States
South Euclid
Ohio
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
So, I am not one of those who voted for this game, but I enjoy it quite a bit as does my regular gaming group. If I were to rate it, I would probably give it at least an 8. What is it about this game that you feel is undeserving of a high rating?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Drew Hicks
United States
Raleigh
North Carolina
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Waylander1 wrote:
I don't particularly care about the ratings except that I use them to help me figure out what I might be interested in. In this case, I was particularly surprised by the disconnect.


I didn't say they're not interested in using BGG, I said they're unlikely to earn 30 GG by being active posters and/or submitting a lot of articles/reviews.

I think you'll find that aggregating together the ratings of many different types of players is unlikely to produce any kind of useful metric for your own enjoyment of a game.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Simon Lundström
Sweden
Täby
flag msg tools
Now who are these five?
badge
Come, come, all children who love fairy tales.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
While I would vote against a weighting system (ratings from users having rated many games would be worth more than those of users having voted or less games), I would, actually, find it good to, by each rating, list how many games that user has rated.

When I find a game with many 10s from users lacking microbadges and avatar, I usually check what other games they have rated (and how many). It does give a bit of information.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stephen Williams
Canada
Mississauga
Ontario
flag msg tools
Avatar
As fate would have it, I'm coming to this game's page to find out whether or not it's a good game. I saw it on the shelf and it looked neat, but I had never heard of it before and I didn't want to buy it blind in case it sucked.

Also as fate would have it, I'm a BGG user without an avatar, but we're not going to go there.

When I want to find out if a game is good, I read reviews. I rarely even look at the rating a game has, let alone who rated what or why. I don't care how many "stars" people think this game ought to have. I care about how the mechanics work. Whether the theme is suitable. If the game requires massive house rules to make it enjoyable. If the components are high quality. The rating system doesn't tell me these things.

The rating system doesn't tell us how good a game is, it tells us how popular a game is. The most popular game in the world may still not be something I personally want to play.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'll be off to the reviews sub-forum...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Drew Hicks
United States
Raleigh
North Carolina
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Stewi wrote:
As fate would have it, I'm coming to this game's page to find out whether or not it's a good game. I saw it on the shelf and it looked neat, but I had never heard of it before and I didn't want to buy it blind in case it sucked.

Also as fate would have it, I'm a BGG user without an avatar, but we're not going to go there.

When I want to find out if a game is good, I read reviews. I rarely even look at the rating a game has, let alone who rated what or why. I don't care how many "stars" people think this game ought to have. I care about how the mechanics work. Whether the theme is suitable. If the game requires massive house rules to make it enjoyable. If the components are high quality. The rating system doesn't tell me these things.

The rating system doesn't tell us how good a game is, it tells us how popular a game is. The most popular game in the world may still not be something I personally want to play.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'll be off to the reviews sub-forum...


I wrote a review I think you might find useful. I didn't like the game, but there's clearly an audience for it. It's just not the kind of game to get a warm reception on BGG, though.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Johnny ONeal
United States
California
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
As the game's designer, this has been a fun discussion to watch. Though I think it's become clear that these non-avatar users are totally legit, I should probably chime in to say that there's no rating-manipulation on our end.

As Drew has pointed out, Boss Monster isn't exactly a BGG kind of game. There are a few reasons why, but the most frequent complaints we see are the lack of long-term strategy and the relatively high degree of randomness.

On the flipside, the more tactical play and the role of luck are things that actually make the game feel less "serious" and more accessible to new players. We see messages like this one almost every day, and we've heard people describe it as a "gateway game."

I'll admit that all the negative feedback from core gamers has sometimes made me a little reluctant to browse and post here, or on r/boardgames. It's all too easy to spend more time on Twitter, Instagram and Facebook, where the feedback is so positive.

But as we move into playtesting for Boss Monster 2, we would like to see if we can win back some of the folks who were disappointed by the original game. An advantage of growing so popular is that it's much easier to recruit people to playtest a game they've heard of.

That's why we're actively trying to recruit playtesters who were negative or neutral on the original. (We also welcome people who actually liked it.) I just posted a link in the Playtest forums with more info, or you can go straight to the Google Form to sign up:

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1G5mHEJSmk_h6inm9QWQfdnE2jRJ...

Whether or not you sign up to playtest, thanks for giving the game a try! The experience of self-publishing Boss Monster has been a dream come true, and hopefully the BGG community can help us make our next version even more successful.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ryan King
United States
Stockbridge
Georgia
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I don't know about it "not being a BGG game", it just has a serious leader problem. I'm totally ready to buy into a newer version, though, if it fixes some of the original flaws. Good Luck!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Drew Hicks
United States
Raleigh
North Carolina
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
JohnnyONeal wrote:
As the game's designer, this has been a fun discussion to watch. Though I think it's become clear that these non-avatar users are totally legit, I should probably chime in to say that there's no rating-manipulation on our end.

As Drew has pointed out, Boss Monster isn't exactly a BGG kind of game. There are a few reasons why, but the most frequent complaints we see are the lack of long-term strategy and the relatively high degree of randomness.

On the flipside, the more tactical play and the role of luck are things that actually make the game feel less "serious" and more accessible to new players. We see messages like this one almost every day, and we've heard people describe it as a "gateway game."

I'll admit that all the negative feedback from core gamers has sometimes made me a little reluctant to browse and post here, or on r/boardgames. It's all too easy to spend more time on Twitter, Instagram and Facebook, where the feedback is so positive.

But as we move into playtesting for Boss Monster 2, we would like to see if we can win back some of the folks who were disappointed by the original game. An advantage of growing so popular is that it's much easier to recruit people to playtest a game they've heard of.

That's why we're actively trying to recruit playtesters who were negative or neutral on the original. (We also welcome people who actually liked it.) I just posted a link in the Playtest forums with more info, or you can go straight to the Google Form to sign up:

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1G5mHEJSmk_h6inm9QWQfdnE2jRJ...

Whether or not you sign up to playtest, thanks for giving the game a try! The experience of self-publishing Boss Monster has been a dream come true, and hopefully the BGG community can help us make our next version even more successful.


Don't let BGG or Reddit get you down! Self included, we tend to be people looking for puzzles to solve, a very specific breed of fun not typically found in any game that causes people to make loud whooping noises rather than distressed, vaguely pained grumbling. Your game obviously has an enthusiastic audience.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Cameron Murtagh
Australia
Kingston
ACT
flag msg tools
mb
I thought the BGG community would be overjoyed at the advent of another gateway game to drag more people into the hobby. Not everything has to be Advanced Squad Leader.

Much as Stephen says above I read reviews over using the abstracted stars system.

I think the more worrisome takeaway from this thread is the sense of elitism from veteran gamers.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.