Jeff Michaud
United States
Longwood
Florida
flag msg tools
On-Line Want List Generator - Hopefully Making Math Trades a Little Bit Easier
badge
Captain Kirk, Captain Picard, Captain Sisko, Captain Janeway, Captain Archer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I submitted a game submission for the upcoming release from Rio Grande Games

"Carcassonne: The New World"

I filled in publisher, designer, play time, number of players, year, checked off the Mechanics, and gave the description from the RGG website:

"In this Carcassonne-style game, players are the brave pioneers who settled the new world.

You begin laying tiles on the east coast and explore westward."


The next day I get the "game submission declined" message with the reason:

"Reason:More information is needed, especially for a new release. Please elaborate and re-submit."

What's worse, as I've complained about before, is that BGG completely removes the submission from the system so you can't just go back and "edit" it, and the rejection doesn't include the info from the submission... so it all has to be re-entered again!

But in this case, are we really supposed to write books? The above, including the description, is more than enough info... once it's approved if others have more info, anyone can now edit the description via the wiki interface.

This is not the 1st time I've had problems with game submissions... guess it depends on a dice roll which BGG "Admin" looks at the submission. And that's another complaint... there is no accountability... the rejection message does not indicate which admin rejected it.

The couple geek gold (worth just 25 cents at the going conversion rate) is just not worth the hassle
9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeff Michaud
United States
Longwood
Florida
flag msg tools
On-Line Want List Generator - Hopefully Making Math Trades a Little Bit Easier
badge
Captain Kirk, Captain Picard, Captain Sisko, Captain Janeway, Captain Archer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
JeffyJeff wrote:
"Reason:More information is needed, especially for a new release. Please elaborate and re-submit."

Reading this again it's funny... more info needed "especially for a new release"... so if it's an old release where plenty of info is available for it it's ok to not elaborate, but if it's a new (and in fact is an upcoming currently unreleased) release one has to elaborate with info only the publisher, designer, or a play tester may have?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robert Wesley
Nepal
Aberdeen
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mb
Re: I give up, jump thru hoops to get a game submission appr
I concur, as I've tried before to get something ONTO here in order to then have that SEEN by someone else who might then JUST be able to provide some MORE additional '411' for such! Could somebody get to making some "voodoo" dolls of these folks here and then take that to the "Wizard" while to have it also:
"get a BRAIN morans"?
surprise
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian Morris
United States
Raytown
Missouri
flag msg tools
2nd, 6th and 7th Wisconsin, 19th Indiana, 24th Michigan
badge
24th Michigan Monument Gettysburg Pa
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: I give up, jump thru hoops to get a game submission appr
It's not like once the game is submitted and accepted the description of the game can't be expanded and elaborated on rather easy. New games often are lacking detailed information in part because they are still in development. That's no reason to reject it being listed on BGG.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott A. Reed
United States
Lawrence
Kansas
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mb
Re: I give up, jump thru hoops to get a game submission appr
A good place to start is http://www.boardgamegeek.com/wiki/page/New_Game_Submission_G....

JeffyJeff wrote:
.... Please elaborate and re-submit."

Indeed, the description you submitted gave one indication of a novel mechanic, the expansion of the game from East-to-West, but really spoke of nothing more about the game. The reason that a new game submission such as this one gets declined is that with the release of the game coming, a user should be expected to put together some more information about the game other than title and publisher.

Though the Wiki system may be used to add onto the description of a game after publishing, I think that in practice there is little "improvement" of game descriptions after the game's entry into the database. To be sure, there are occasional edits of game descriptions, and a corps of users such as fuzzyfife and zefquaavius who work on the wiki all of the time, but after a personal stroll through database entries, I have seen many games that go wanting in the area of descriptions -- heck, I even ran a project for a little while where I solicited descriptions for 60-some games in the database that had no description. Prior to running that, some database stalwarts such as Battle Line, Shadows in the Forest, and Express sat without descriptions for long long whiles.

The point of this is that a game needs to have a description that describes to the user what the game is about, and how it differs from other games in the database. For example, something along the lines of the paragraph in Carcassonne: Hunters and Gatherers would be exactly what I am looking for -- it describes the game, references the game from which it comes, and distinguishes one from the other.

JeffyJeff wrote:
the rejection message does not indicate which admin rejected it.

In almost all situations, I'm the admin that does the accepting and rejecting. If you check the Admins page, mine says "Submitted Games Approval".

JeffyJeff wrote:
if it's an old release where plenty of info is available for it it's ok to not elaborate, but if it's a new ...

The standard of old v. new is such that older releases for which there may not be much information get accepted on a de minimis standard, as researching information on games produced decades ago may be difficult; but new games presumably will have promotion and publisher-released information, and theoretically will have new information about the game coming out in greater and greater quantities as the release date approaches.
11 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian Morris
United States
Raytown
Missouri
flag msg tools
2nd, 6th and 7th Wisconsin, 19th Indiana, 24th Michigan
badge
24th Michigan Monument Gettysburg Pa
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: I give up, jump thru hoops to get a game submission appr
I decided to take a look and see what type of game descriptions were deemed acceptable for new games. Here are the complete descriptions provided for a number games that were accepted over the last several days.

Colorado Trivia

A trivia game based on Colorado. Categories include 'Personalities', 'History', 'On the Rocks', and more.

Don't Wake the Giant

A game similar to Operation where players attempt to retrieve stolen treasures from a giant without waking him up by using a pair of tweezers and not touching the edges where the treasure is stored. Ages 6 and up.

Game of Parlor Baseball

McLoughlin Game of Parlor Baseball from 1897. Actually Spin the Spinners type game. Features two spinners and nine yellow and nine blue game pieces. The very limited information for this game was gathered from Morphy Auctions.


The Improved Game of Fish Pond

Mcloughlin Brothers Improved Game of Fish Pond from 1890. The game has stacks of cardboard fish plus wood poles and metal hooks. Object of the game was to catch as many fish as possible. Each fish had as different value.

Tim Lahaye's Bible Trivia

Be the first player or team to collect 6 Bible coins by answering questions correctly. Includes 500 cards with 2000 questions.


I would say that almost half of the new games accepted in just the last few days (there have been a lot of them too) have this level of description. It would seem to me that the gentleman's description above is at least as good if not better than the games listed above and many other games I didn't list that were all accepted.




4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Frank Eisenhauer
India
New Delhi
Delhi
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Not enough information about new mechanics? that should exclude any new Monopoly clone from ever getting onto the BGG. Huzzaah!
Fun aside, I would like to see more information about new & upcomming games, but what I like even more the information about the fact that a new game is going to be published.
Best Regards
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian Morris
United States
Raytown
Missouri
flag msg tools
2nd, 6th and 7th Wisconsin, 19th Indiana, 24th Michigan
badge
24th Michigan Monument Gettysburg Pa
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: I give up, jump thru hoops to get a game submission appr
Looks like my being critical cost me as our good admin here got some pay back on me for speaking out. I submitted several new games the other day and all were denied with the excuse that more information was needed. I submitted more info than half of the games that get accepted but my submissions were denied.

So the lesson here folks is don't speak out against an admin or face the consequences.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul DeStefano
United States
Long Island
New York
flag msg tools
designer
badge
It's a Zendrum. www.zendrum.com
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
mrbeankc wrote:
Looks like my being critical cost me as our good admin here got some pay back on me for speaking out. I submitted several new games the other day and all were denied with the excuse that more information was needed. I submitted more info than half of the games that get accepted but my submissions were denied.

So the lesson here folks is don't speak out against an admin or face the consequences.


Or the lesson here is that all the prior submission were when there were less strict guidelines and people complained about shoddy submissions. Rather than go through tens of thousands of games to delete them, they start by disallowing new submissions that are shoddy.

Also, I doubt the mods even notice who submits what. I believe you have a severe paranoia.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian Morris
United States
Raytown
Missouri
flag msg tools
2nd, 6th and 7th Wisconsin, 19th Indiana, 24th Michigan
badge
24th Michigan Monument Gettysburg Pa
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: I give up, jump thru hoops to get a game submission appr
He noticed who submitted it alright. He included a short bit in the denial message I got referring to this thread.

Now I don't believe the admin here honestly was aiming for payback on me. I certainly hope not because we've actually met quite a few times and he's a very nice chap. I said that above a bit tongue in cheek so don't take that to seriously. Mind you it came across a bit more serious than I intended so apologies to our good admin if he read that and took offence.

As I posted above my problem is with consistency. We've got countless submissions where a one sentence description is sufficient (I posted just a small fraction of what comes in weekly to BGG) and then suddenly a slightly longer more detailed description is denied for being not detailed enough. I don't mind there being standards. I applaud that. I'm indeed one of those who complains about bad pictures and was called a Nazi for taking that stance.

My point is that half the new games being approved have short descriptions and the submission that started this thread was more detailed than half the submissions being approved. If you are going to approve dozens of submissions with one and two sentence descriptions then you can't turn around and suddenly deny others with similar description lengths. You need to be consistent with what you approve and what you don't. If this is indeed the level of description he is going to accept then it has to apply to all submissions.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Canada
Burlington
Ontario
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
It happened to me too. I submitted a new Ystari game mid-August. It's the first time I'd tried this and so read the guidelines on required information carefully. It was rejected.

I thought folks might be interested in a new Ystari title, but they'll just have to wait.... ninja
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Martin Stever
United States
Bainbridge Island
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I've got just over 100 game submissions in the database, and I've found Scott to be very good about it. The few times he's questioned a submission, he was spot on with some good questions. We've only disagreed once, so less than 1% of the time he had no idea what the hell he was talking about.

That said, I agree with Scott that on a new release from a major manufacturer, there should be more than 2 lines of description. An easy out is:

From the publisher's web site:
blah blah blah blah

I do go back on almost all my entries and clean them up and expand them at least once and often several times. My guess is that Scott goes easy on me knowing that.

I also think the for doing a new entry is far, far easier than the typical .5 one gets from doing a session report or for doing a review. So I don't agree that it's too painful a process to endure based on /effort.

Finally, I don't agree with the argument that the bar for a good entry should be set one smidge higher than the worst entry we can find in the database. If that held water, every entry would be terrible.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ron Pfeiffer
United States
Surfside Beach
South Carolina
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I think that overall Scott does a very good job with new entries into the site. He takes into consideration how old the game being submitted is and how likely a better description is going to happen. An 1890 game has little likelyhood of having its desription improved upon (unless of course you happen to be the owner of one of those 1890 games), while a game from 2007 can be more easily researched and more imformation is likely to be available. It is easy for a submitter of a game from 2007 to get a better and more thorough description of the game.

Do I always agree with Scott when he makes decisions? NO but do I feel that Scott is fair and do I feel that Scott makes reasonable decisions? YES. Scott works hard at this basically thankless job and should be applauded at least once in a while for spending many many hours of his week doing it for the GEEK.
About my only complaint would be that there is no place that a submitter can argue his position to Scott. You should be able to respond to the TURN DOWN with valid reasons that you think apply to your submission as to why that submission should be accepted.

I also feel the same way about MODDERS, actually MODDERS bother me a whole lot more, as first pictures of games are turned down for not being good enough when the likelyhood of ever seeing another picture of that old game is pratically non existant. Modders somehow now think of themselves as the PICTURE POLICE and instead of considering the entire situation about a submitted picture they turn them down for not be clear enough, or not being able to read the writing even though their may never be another entry for that game.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott A. Reed
United States
Lawrence
Kansas
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mb
Re: I give up, jump thru hoops to get a game submission appr
mrbeankc wrote:
Looks like my being critical cost me as our good admin here got some pay back on me for speaking out. I submitted several new games the other day and all were denied with the excuse that more information was needed. I submitted more info than half of the games that get accepted but my submissions were denied.

So the lesson here folks is don't speak out against an admin or face the consequences.

Actually, Brian, the denials on your two submissions had nothing to do with your commentary in this forum and had everything to do with submitting newly released games with a dearth of information. The actual lesson is to submit a game with a reasonable amount of information if you expect it to get accepted. I forget my actual language, but you have it in the messages that were sent to you, but I wrote to the effect that you cannot merely scrape a press release for a minimum of information and then submit that for a new game submission.

As for the issue of consistency and games that have been approved with a lesser description, I thought I had cleared that up somewhat with the New Game Submission Guideline link. Here's what I have to say about it there:
New Game Submission Guidelines wrote:
The primary category of concern is the description. A good description for a newly-released game will consist of at least a paragraph and will cover what the game is about theme-wise, how the game plays, what mechanisms are used, and perhaps even what the victory conditions are. Additionally, the description may discuss the contents of the game box, but that is extra, and a components list alone does not a game description make.
Older games (e.g. more than 10 years old) can slide with lesser information, just so they are included in the database; as with new game entries, the more information included, the better. An unacceptable description for an older game might be "The box has a picture of a cowboy on it" where an acceptable description might be "An old roll-and-move game about cattle rustling"


As I state in there, there is a higher standard for newer-released games, as there should be more information available about them, or information about them will be more forthcoming as they near release. It is not sufficient for a game that has been announced to submit it as "To be released at Essen" or something like the same. Similarly, to submit a game with a minimum of information as has been released by the publisher (including the publisher's flowery press-release-speak) is not sufficient either. A game entry needs to stand alone. But, with that, there is a sliding scale of acceptability for older games, because information can be difficult to research on older obscure games. In the example given above, the games are from the years 1890, 1897, 1984, 2003, and 2005. Granted, I guess I could have asked for a little more information on the 2005 game, but as a trivia game, what else can one say? Ask questions and answer them. And I think that the entry for the 2003 game captures the spirit of the game rather succinctly.

My goal with approving games is neither to be arbitrary nor vindictive. When looking over game submissions, I have a standard in mind that I seek to apply fairly to all submissions. I have denied designers submitting their own games because they fell short of what would be necessary for a good description. Additionally, as Ron points out, I do do all of this on a volunteer basis. I have no stake in BGG, I don't get paid a nickel (other than an entry to BGG.con) and I spend about 15-20 hours per week doing BGG work.

Oh, and for clarity, Brian, we've not met, unless we ran into one another at BGG.con and I don't recall it. I have yet to come to Tabletop to play games, and you've not been out to play games with the Strang Line Spielers.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
Re: I give up, jump thru hoops to get a game submission appr
skelebone wrote:
I thought I had cleared that up somewhat with the New Game Submission Guideline link.


This is great information. I suggest linking this from the game submission form (i.e., Misc > Add Game).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Gibbs
Canada
Ottawa
Ontario
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
fuzzyfife wrote:

I also feel the same way about MODDERS, actually MODDERS bother me a whole lot more, as first pictures of games are turned down for not being good enough when the likelyhood of ever seeing another picture of that old game is pratically non existant. Modders somehow now think of themselves as the PICTURE POLICE and instead of considering the entire situation about a submitted picture they turn them down for not be clear enough, or not being able to read the writing even though their may never be another entry for that game.


I don't know about other modders -- but I pay attention to how many images a game has. If a game has 0 images, I'll approve most anything that looks useable, even if it is nowhere near perfect. But, if a game already has 300 images for it, then I'm going to be down right bloody picky about the image being perfectly focussed, framed, shot, etc.

I also find that the first 5-10 images submitted for a game tend to be highly relevant -- pictures of the box, board, game pieces, etc. After that people seem to start to try get "creative" to get yet another image submitted (for the GG), without those images actually adding much (to anything) in the way of useful information about the game.

Really, how much does a worm's-eye view of the meeples on the board really add?
1 
 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.