Well, I'm wrong again. This time it's just been one day since my last post. I think that I may make this blog slightly more regular than I had planned, by reporting interesting goings on, while I wait to write something meaningful about games. I really will do that sometime I promise. But anyway here is what is new in the last 24 hours.
New Web Site
There is apparantly a new web site that purports to be about the latest game news. They cover board games, collectible card games, role playing games, and miniature games. Their mandate is wider than either Board Game News or Board Game Geek. You also seem to be able to download the Dice Tower from them. What's that about? I'm not really sure what they are about yet, but they might be worth watching.
You've probably noticed that I haven't mentioned their name yet. That's because it's a discussion in itself. They call themselves The Game Geek or sometimes The Game Geek News, (that's their web address). I would have thought that this name is pretty much taken. Perhaps they are hoping to trade on confusion with the name of Board Game Geek. I've taken Intellectual Property law, and this is very close to the line of violation of trademark and possibly over that line. So they may only be around until the cease and desist letters arrive. They have been added to my links.
Another Exile
The inimitable Mr. Skeletor has made his decision to leave the Geek official. He's made a fairwell Geek List mourning the graves of the banished. It looks like hobitti's banning was the inspiration for the list. My understanding is that Mr. Skeletor might post occasionally, but he is basically done. It's a great loss for the Geek, as his posts are consistently amusing. However, on the balance its a win for me because of two reasons:
a) Mr Skeletor was holding back and (mostly) respecting the rules. On F:AT and so far the Wiki he has been insulting paople with flair and aplomb. Did I mention Mr. Skeletor is Australian.
b) He's writing longer pieces now for F:AT. His pieces are usually humourous, and not so much about ideas or reviews. They're consistently entertaining.
Mr. Skeletor's memorial Geek List was only erratically on the front page of the Geek. It kept disappearing for mysterious reasons. Here is the list:
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/21331
Thursday, May 3, 2007
Wednesday, May 2, 2007
The Rebellion Spreads
Well it looks like this time the wait is only two days between posts. That means that the next post should be in mid June.
This post will be just a quick update, on the new and exciting news in the world of board games. Before beginning I want to say that if there is anything more useless than board game politics, I don't know what it is. I had planned to write a very long post on board game politics, and had written about half of it. My thinking was that the Big Kerfuffle had died down, and it was now time for some sober reflection. But since I wrote it the number of banned users has gone from 1 to 3 (if the new rumor is true), and the exciting events just keep coming. So lets look at what is hot off the ticker...
News
The most interesting thing is that a new board game site has started. It's the Board Game Wiki and can be found on my links page. It's been started in some ways as a reaction to BGG, and is meant to be a more democratic place. You can find it under my links. It's way too soon to see if it will flourish, but I wish them well. I want a place to post, but the attitude on the Geek sticks in my craw, and they are slowly chasing all the interesting people off that site. So I'm hoping it will work out.
What I find amusing about the whole thing is that there has been a negative reaction from a few of the BGG fans (although, to be fair, it has been small). One of the thing that I never got about BGG was all the people who would say "If you don't like it here, start you're own site," who clearly never understood that this was possible. The internet is the most democratic thing ever invented. It has never been easier to make your voice heard. As the number of disaffected users of BGG grows, it's inevitable that some other site will spring up as an alternative to it. The Geek has failed to be inclusive (perhaps that was inevitable), more seriously it is failing to change as the board game fan base changes.
Some Background
For those of you who don't know BGG banned their first user, a young scallywag named Michael Barnes, almost two months ago. While Michael could certainly be abrasive he was banned for making personal attacks. I was busy posting in the thread that Michael was banned in, and I can tell you that there were a lot of personal attacks because I was subject to quite a few of them. I was waiting for the admins to step in and save me, but some of them were some of the same people making personal attacks. Anyway, Michael rated no higher than twentieth on the list of nasty posters on that thread. But he was the one that got banned.
He got banned for saying that Scott Alden (the owner of BGG) was full of crap. In theory this was because it was a personal attack. Events have proved differently. About two weeks ago, another BGG user Steve Weeks got his temporary ban turned into a permanent one. To be frank, I can see why you might ban Steve Weeks. I think Barnes had toed the line, but Weeks crossed it. However he was banned for things he said in his podcast, hosted on his own web site! Those things were criticising Scott Alden, again.
Ban #3
Well the new rumor is that a new user has been banned. That user is a crazy Finn named hobbitti. Hobitti is a very strange man. I like him, but I have a weakness for all things Finnish. I f you check out my profile, you'll see I love the Moomintroll books which are weird Finnish children's books. A side effect of my love of those books is that I have a soft spot for all things Finnish, including hobitti. He's also been quite vocal in his criticism of Scott Alden, and the banning of Michael Barnes. He has said nothing even remotely resembling a personal attack to anyone, although he has taken tons of abuse. The ban is meant to be for a week. If this is true, it proves that personal attacks are not what get you banned, but vocal criticism of Scott Alden is. (Although, vocal criticisms of other board game glitterati certainly helps.) So we'll see if its real or not. Check out hobitti's stuff. It's strange. I found the discussion of the banning on the new wiki site here:
http://www2.boardgamewiki.com/forum/t-8729/a-third-banning-on-bgg
Fortress: AmeriTrash
If for some reason you've found this blog, but not Fortress Ameritrash (this means you Dave) you should check them out. Fortress Ameritrash is a blog started by several of the most prominant Ameritrashers, including the infamous Barnes on the day he was banned (although I believe that this was a strange coincidence). In the less than two months it has been up and running its become the most important blog on board games (and gets by far the most feedback). In fact, it is the second most important board game web site there is (perhaps the wiki can overtake it). If you enjoy interesting ideas, good reviews (they are a model of how game reviewing should be done), humor, and highly creative off colour insults it is the blog for you. If you don't, don't read my blog.
So just to conclude. The Geek is weird. Banning seems to be getting easier. We have a new site. Let's hope it takes off. And Fortress: AmeriTrash is the second most important site on games on the internet. You heard that here first.
This post will be just a quick update, on the new and exciting news in the world of board games. Before beginning I want to say that if there is anything more useless than board game politics, I don't know what it is. I had planned to write a very long post on board game politics, and had written about half of it. My thinking was that the Big Kerfuffle had died down, and it was now time for some sober reflection. But since I wrote it the number of banned users has gone from 1 to 3 (if the new rumor is true), and the exciting events just keep coming. So lets look at what is hot off the ticker...
News
The most interesting thing is that a new board game site has started. It's the Board Game Wiki and can be found on my links page. It's been started in some ways as a reaction to BGG, and is meant to be a more democratic place. You can find it under my links. It's way too soon to see if it will flourish, but I wish them well. I want a place to post, but the attitude on the Geek sticks in my craw, and they are slowly chasing all the interesting people off that site. So I'm hoping it will work out.
What I find amusing about the whole thing is that there has been a negative reaction from a few of the BGG fans (although, to be fair, it has been small). One of the thing that I never got about BGG was all the people who would say "If you don't like it here, start you're own site," who clearly never understood that this was possible. The internet is the most democratic thing ever invented. It has never been easier to make your voice heard. As the number of disaffected users of BGG grows, it's inevitable that some other site will spring up as an alternative to it. The Geek has failed to be inclusive (perhaps that was inevitable), more seriously it is failing to change as the board game fan base changes.
Some Background
For those of you who don't know BGG banned their first user, a young scallywag named Michael Barnes, almost two months ago. While Michael could certainly be abrasive he was banned for making personal attacks. I was busy posting in the thread that Michael was banned in, and I can tell you that there were a lot of personal attacks because I was subject to quite a few of them. I was waiting for the admins to step in and save me, but some of them were some of the same people making personal attacks. Anyway, Michael rated no higher than twentieth on the list of nasty posters on that thread. But he was the one that got banned.
He got banned for saying that Scott Alden (the owner of BGG) was full of crap. In theory this was because it was a personal attack. Events have proved differently. About two weeks ago, another BGG user Steve Weeks got his temporary ban turned into a permanent one. To be frank, I can see why you might ban Steve Weeks. I think Barnes had toed the line, but Weeks crossed it. However he was banned for things he said in his podcast, hosted on his own web site! Those things were criticising Scott Alden, again.
Ban #3
Well the new rumor is that a new user has been banned. That user is a crazy Finn named hobbitti. Hobitti is a very strange man. I like him, but I have a weakness for all things Finnish. I f you check out my profile, you'll see I love the Moomintroll books which are weird Finnish children's books. A side effect of my love of those books is that I have a soft spot for all things Finnish, including hobitti. He's also been quite vocal in his criticism of Scott Alden, and the banning of Michael Barnes. He has said nothing even remotely resembling a personal attack to anyone, although he has taken tons of abuse. The ban is meant to be for a week. If this is true, it proves that personal attacks are not what get you banned, but vocal criticism of Scott Alden is. (Although, vocal criticisms of other board game glitterati certainly helps.) So we'll see if its real or not. Check out hobitti's stuff. It's strange. I found the discussion of the banning on the new wiki site here:
http://www2.boardgamewiki.com/forum/t-8729/a-third-banning-on-bgg
Fortress: AmeriTrash
If for some reason you've found this blog, but not Fortress Ameritrash (this means you Dave) you should check them out. Fortress Ameritrash is a blog started by several of the most prominant Ameritrashers, including the infamous Barnes on the day he was banned (although I believe that this was a strange coincidence). In the less than two months it has been up and running its become the most important blog on board games (and gets by far the most feedback). In fact, it is the second most important board game web site there is (perhaps the wiki can overtake it). If you enjoy interesting ideas, good reviews (they are a model of how game reviewing should be done), humor, and highly creative off colour insults it is the blog for you. If you don't, don't read my blog.
So just to conclude. The Geek is weird. Banning seems to be getting easier. We have a new site. Let's hope it takes off. And Fortress: AmeriTrash is the second most important site on games on the internet. You heard that here first.
Tuesday, May 1, 2007
The Gathering of Friends
Well, I picked just about the worst time possible to start a blog. I've been sick, had exams, various bits of bureaucracy to deal with, and a very busy personal life. It became obvious that if I didn't post something soon that this blog would die a slow death. However, I can guarantee you that this won't be unusual. You'll be happy to know that I feel no responsibility to you the reader, and I'll post when I feel like it. Expect three things a week or nothing for six weeks. However, I intend anything topical to be already out of date when I write it, so you'll miss nothing if you wander in at random every two months.
Todays post will demonstrate all of the above. I don't want to write about anything I care about, because I am just cranking this out, and this topic would have been better two weeks ago, so I'm going to write about The Gathering of Friends.
For those of you who don't know, The Gathering of Friends is a board game convention, held in, I believe, Columbus Ohio by Alan Moon. Alan Moon is the designer of the Ticket to Ride series amongst many other games. The Gathering seems to be the most important board game convention in North America. The board game big wigs are more likely to attend it than the other conventions, and a lot of deigners test out prototypes there. However, The Gathering is invitation only. If you don't get an invite you can't come. Alan Moon has strict control of the invite list, and to get on it you either need to know Alan Moon or to be recommended by several other gathering attendees.
This invitation only aspect causes an annual bitch fest about the exclusivity of the event. In part this is because there are always numerous articles and postings about how great The Gathering is, complete with name dropping of the board game glitterati, and of all the great new secret games that can't be talked about. My undertsanding that this year is not as bad as previous years, and in fact there has not been much about it at Board Game Geek. The centre for the discussion has been on Board Game News which in some ways seems to be a web site written by, and for, Gathering attendees. The Gathering attendees are basically the high profile Euro game old schoolers.
I've only seen two justifications offered that I've seen for the invitation only nature of the event are 1) If it got any bigger, they couldn't rent a ball room and would have to rent a giant convention centre, and 2) to keep the Riff Raff out.
The first of these justifications is a silly one, because tickets could be sold on a first come, first served basis. More importantly it requires that there be no intermediate size spaces for conventions. As everyone knows, conventions come in all shapes and sizes, not just really big and really small. That leaves the second justification.
It might seem surprising, but some gathering attendees make no bones about the fact that the exclusivity of the event is to keep out undesirables, and I think we can be assured that that is the real reason.
There is nothing terribly strange about an exclusive convention. Many industry conventions are exclusive. There are technology conventions that are for people in the industry only, and the general public is not allowed in. What makes The Gathering strange is that it is not really an industry convention. As I understand it, the primary thing that people do is play board games and socialize. There is some testing out of upcoming releases and prototypes, but the focus is on gaming and not on business, and you don't have to be involved in the business (even as a vocal internet fan) to attend. So the Gathering is neither fish nor fowl. I think things like The Gathering and the often poor reviewing skills of some of the most prominent reviewers of board games, point to the fact that in North America, the board games industry hasn't really reached a full level of professionalism yet. As a result we often see a weird pointless elitism in the industry. (Of course, some of this can probaly be layed at the door of bullying in junior high of certain key players.)
So should we then denounce The Gathering? My view is no. I can't think of The Gathering of Friends without thinking of the episode of South Park which features the goateed Evil Cartman from the parallel universe. Evil Cartman sings a song which goes; "You guys are my best friends...best friends are we." From what I know of the Gathering it would have a lot of Evil Cartman's in it. I'm sure that not everyone is like that, but I worry that there would be sufficiently few people that wouldn't be, that I would find the whole experience strange, and I would have no one to make fun of it to.
Putting it simply, I'm part of the Riff Raff they want to keep out, and I'm quite glad to be kept out. It sounds fantasticly unfun. I can't imagine a worse gaming experience than playing a game of Memoir 44 Overlord with Tom Vasel or Greg Schlosser as my commander. I also wouldn't enjoy a convention where I could never swear or would have to hear a million conversations about a game being bad because it had player elimination, or another equation of luck with a lack of skill. I'm sure not everyone would be that way, but from the reporting that seems to be the predominant tone. If I play games I want to have fun, and The Gathering doesn't seem that much fun.
The Gathering is probably becoming less relevant anyway. More and more people are coming to the internet about board gaming and tastes are becoming more diverse. The zenith of Euros seems to be behind us. What's happening is that the old board game glitterati have in many cases walled themselves off. As new ideas (new rulers as Ubarose would put it) become more common place, the old guard has found itself behind the times. For the most part their reaction has been defensive, and in most cases they have ignored critics (or at least not publically responded to them).
The most obvious example of this is the AmeriTrash movement. It might seem that the AmeriTrash movement hates the Gathering. Steve Weeks has vocally slammed them in several of his podcasts, and Alan Moon even got to make his enemies list. But I think, as is often the case, Steve Weeks reaction is atypical of the AmeriTrash movement. I think most AmeriTrashers could not care less one way or the other about The Gathering. That's because, like me, they don't want to play those games with those people in that atmosphere. It sounds boring. Instead, I think the most vocal detractors are for the most part amongst the people who really look up to that group. They really want to be there, to meet those people and game in that atmosphere. It's their idea of gaming Nirvana. The Gathering, in the end is I think an own goal. Sure they might exclude the odd undesirable, but in turn for doing that they alienate their own fan base. They tell the bulk of their fans and followers you are not worthy to come.
If he was being sensible Alan Moon would open the convention, but I don't care if he does.
Well, that was longer than I intended. See you in six weeks or two days.
Todays post will demonstrate all of the above. I don't want to write about anything I care about, because I am just cranking this out, and this topic would have been better two weeks ago, so I'm going to write about The Gathering of Friends.
For those of you who don't know, The Gathering of Friends is a board game convention, held in, I believe, Columbus Ohio by Alan Moon. Alan Moon is the designer of the Ticket to Ride series amongst many other games. The Gathering seems to be the most important board game convention in North America. The board game big wigs are more likely to attend it than the other conventions, and a lot of deigners test out prototypes there. However, The Gathering is invitation only. If you don't get an invite you can't come. Alan Moon has strict control of the invite list, and to get on it you either need to know Alan Moon or to be recommended by several other gathering attendees.
This invitation only aspect causes an annual bitch fest about the exclusivity of the event. In part this is because there are always numerous articles and postings about how great The Gathering is, complete with name dropping of the board game glitterati, and of all the great new secret games that can't be talked about. My undertsanding that this year is not as bad as previous years, and in fact there has not been much about it at Board Game Geek. The centre for the discussion has been on Board Game News which in some ways seems to be a web site written by, and for, Gathering attendees. The Gathering attendees are basically the high profile Euro game old schoolers.
I've only seen two justifications offered that I've seen for the invitation only nature of the event are 1) If it got any bigger, they couldn't rent a ball room and would have to rent a giant convention centre, and 2) to keep the Riff Raff out.
The first of these justifications is a silly one, because tickets could be sold on a first come, first served basis. More importantly it requires that there be no intermediate size spaces for conventions. As everyone knows, conventions come in all shapes and sizes, not just really big and really small. That leaves the second justification.
It might seem surprising, but some gathering attendees make no bones about the fact that the exclusivity of the event is to keep out undesirables, and I think we can be assured that that is the real reason.
There is nothing terribly strange about an exclusive convention. Many industry conventions are exclusive. There are technology conventions that are for people in the industry only, and the general public is not allowed in. What makes The Gathering strange is that it is not really an industry convention. As I understand it, the primary thing that people do is play board games and socialize. There is some testing out of upcoming releases and prototypes, but the focus is on gaming and not on business, and you don't have to be involved in the business (even as a vocal internet fan) to attend. So the Gathering is neither fish nor fowl. I think things like The Gathering and the often poor reviewing skills of some of the most prominent reviewers of board games, point to the fact that in North America, the board games industry hasn't really reached a full level of professionalism yet. As a result we often see a weird pointless elitism in the industry. (Of course, some of this can probaly be layed at the door of bullying in junior high of certain key players.)
So should we then denounce The Gathering? My view is no. I can't think of The Gathering of Friends without thinking of the episode of South Park which features the goateed Evil Cartman from the parallel universe. Evil Cartman sings a song which goes; "You guys are my best friends...best friends are we." From what I know of the Gathering it would have a lot of Evil Cartman's in it. I'm sure that not everyone is like that, but I worry that there would be sufficiently few people that wouldn't be, that I would find the whole experience strange, and I would have no one to make fun of it to.
Putting it simply, I'm part of the Riff Raff they want to keep out, and I'm quite glad to be kept out. It sounds fantasticly unfun. I can't imagine a worse gaming experience than playing a game of Memoir 44 Overlord with Tom Vasel or Greg Schlosser as my commander. I also wouldn't enjoy a convention where I could never swear or would have to hear a million conversations about a game being bad because it had player elimination, or another equation of luck with a lack of skill. I'm sure not everyone would be that way, but from the reporting that seems to be the predominant tone. If I play games I want to have fun, and The Gathering doesn't seem that much fun.
The Gathering is probably becoming less relevant anyway. More and more people are coming to the internet about board gaming and tastes are becoming more diverse. The zenith of Euros seems to be behind us. What's happening is that the old board game glitterati have in many cases walled themselves off. As new ideas (new rulers as Ubarose would put it) become more common place, the old guard has found itself behind the times. For the most part their reaction has been defensive, and in most cases they have ignored critics (or at least not publically responded to them).
The most obvious example of this is the AmeriTrash movement. It might seem that the AmeriTrash movement hates the Gathering. Steve Weeks has vocally slammed them in several of his podcasts, and Alan Moon even got to make his enemies list. But I think, as is often the case, Steve Weeks reaction is atypical of the AmeriTrash movement. I think most AmeriTrashers could not care less one way or the other about The Gathering. That's because, like me, they don't want to play those games with those people in that atmosphere. It sounds boring. Instead, I think the most vocal detractors are for the most part amongst the people who really look up to that group. They really want to be there, to meet those people and game in that atmosphere. It's their idea of gaming Nirvana. The Gathering, in the end is I think an own goal. Sure they might exclude the odd undesirable, but in turn for doing that they alienate their own fan base. They tell the bulk of their fans and followers you are not worthy to come.
If he was being sensible Alan Moon would open the convention, but I don't care if he does.
Well, that was longer than I intended. See you in six weeks or two days.
Monday, April 16, 2007
My First Post
Dear Reader,
Welcome to The Rebel.
I thought, since I have a blogger account and I no longer post on BGG, I might as well start my own blog. Actually, I'm not a giant fan of the blog format. So, hopefully this will be only a temporary measure, because my plan is to at some point start a web site, with a friend of mine, and to host our own print and play game there. If you are very lucky, there will be a podcast as well, but that depends upon how board I am.
I've picked a format with cubes at the top so as to be welcoming to any Euro gamer who wanders in here.
Up until, two months ago, I would not have thought it would be possible to be a board game rebel, but it turns out that it is. It also turns out that I am one. So you can come here to read my rebelious thoughts about board games. But not today.
Instead, dear reader, I'm going to ask you a question. My friend and I are currently trying to rename our print and play game. The game is a variant of Risk, and was named Nuclear Risk. Unfortunately, its name horribly violates trademark, hence the need for a new name. The game adds a deck of cards to Risk. These cards try to represent everything in both real world warfare, and in B science fiction movies set now or in the near future. The game is whimsical, not for the easily offended, and probably the most chaotic game ever created. The game really is not about long term strategy, but about reacting to unforeseen and cataclysmic events. It's also about dishing out cataclysmic events on your enemies. In addition, the game tosses balance out the window. If you like unfair games, it's for you.
So, dear reader, (all two of you) please leave a comment on which of these names is most enticing and would prove irresistable to you, or, if you like, you can suggest your own:
Global Thermonuclear War
Clash of the SuperPowers
Weapons of Mass Destruction
The Folly of War
Welcome to The Rebel.
I thought, since I have a blogger account and I no longer post on BGG, I might as well start my own blog. Actually, I'm not a giant fan of the blog format. So, hopefully this will be only a temporary measure, because my plan is to at some point start a web site, with a friend of mine, and to host our own print and play game there. If you are very lucky, there will be a podcast as well, but that depends upon how board I am.
I've picked a format with cubes at the top so as to be welcoming to any Euro gamer who wanders in here.
Up until, two months ago, I would not have thought it would be possible to be a board game rebel, but it turns out that it is. It also turns out that I am one. So you can come here to read my rebelious thoughts about board games. But not today.
Instead, dear reader, I'm going to ask you a question. My friend and I are currently trying to rename our print and play game. The game is a variant of Risk, and was named Nuclear Risk. Unfortunately, its name horribly violates trademark, hence the need for a new name. The game adds a deck of cards to Risk. These cards try to represent everything in both real world warfare, and in B science fiction movies set now or in the near future. The game is whimsical, not for the easily offended, and probably the most chaotic game ever created. The game really is not about long term strategy, but about reacting to unforeseen and cataclysmic events. It's also about dishing out cataclysmic events on your enemies. In addition, the game tosses balance out the window. If you like unfair games, it's for you.
So, dear reader, (all two of you) please leave a comment on which of these names is most enticing and would prove irresistable to you, or, if you like, you can suggest your own:
Global Thermonuclear War
Clash of the SuperPowers
Weapons of Mass Destruction
The Folly of War
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
