Isn’t this, at least partly, a design issue? Game designers create their games without concern about the economical side of the problem. They create astounding little bits and pieces to make the game desirable but a lot of this could be simplified without sacrificing the mechanics. The dice are a prime example…
It’s a lot like what happened in the video games and the rift that appeared between AAA games and indie developers.
A lot of the games I possess are beautiful but have a ludicrous amount of accessory stuff. Eventually it gets lost and replaced by coins and painted pieces of wood without making them worse.
I suspect that until now all these tidbits were a great way to justify the high price of the games.
There are many people for whom the nice bits and pieces enhance their enjoyment of the game. I’m certainly one of them. I know others who take it a step further and will buy games just because they’re pretty / cute / whatever. It’s not a design issue, it’s appealing to a larger market.
‘So expensive that only a few can afford it’ is pretty hyperbole. Boardgaming is one of the cheapest hobbies you can have, especially on a cost per time basis. I would much rather pay an extra few bucks for nicer pieces for a game that I’m going to enjoy for years and years.
I happen to run a boardgame club, and I can attest that pretty much everybody I’ve talked to about this topic feels the same way. Given the choice between a classic game with cardboard chits or a newer game with the same mechanics and prettier pieces, we’re playing the new one every time.
I’m not sure what your point is? According to bgg, it released in 1987 at a RRP of $17. I’m hoping the message is that my collection will pay for my early retirement.
Isn’t this, at least partly, a design issue? Game designers create their games without concern about the economical side of the problem. They create astounding little bits and pieces to make the game desirable but a lot of this could be simplified without sacrificing the mechanics. The dice are a prime example…
It’s a lot like what happened in the video games and the rift that appeared between AAA games and indie developers.
A lot of the games I possess are beautiful but have a ludicrous amount of accessory stuff. Eventually it gets lost and replaced by coins and painted pieces of wood without making them worse.
I suspect that until now all these tidbits were a great way to justify the high price of the games.
There are many people for whom the nice bits and pieces enhance their enjoyment of the game. I’m certainly one of them. I know others who take it a step further and will buy games just because they’re pretty / cute / whatever. It’s not a design issue, it’s appealing to a larger market.
Removed by mod
‘So expensive that only a few can afford it’ is pretty hyperbole. Boardgaming is one of the cheapest hobbies you can have, especially on a cost per time basis. I would much rather pay an extra few bucks for nicer pieces for a game that I’m going to enjoy for years and years.
I happen to run a boardgame club, and I can attest that pretty much everybody I’ve talked to about this topic feels the same way. Given the choice between a classic game with cardboard chits or a newer game with the same mechanics and prettier pieces, we’re playing the new one every time.
Haha yes, I play all of these boardgames more than once!
Our club copy of Bloodlines has gotten about 20 plays since we got it 2 weeks back 😂. Granted, that’s something of an outlier.
Removed by mod
No idea, had honestly never heard of that game before now.
Removed by mod
I’m not sure what your point is? According to bgg, it released in 1987 at a RRP of $17. I’m hoping the message is that my collection will pay for my early retirement.
https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgameversion/141924/english-deluxe-fourth-edition
Removed by mod
No, and they should be designing their game to be exactly the way they want, with no consideration for psycho governments whatsoever.