An incredible game review article

[Danzauker]

Ticket To Ride is hard and boring? Oh wow, what in the world is going on? That is a favorite game of my non-board game friends. It's looked down upon as an entry-level game at the board game club. Who did this review, 10-year old girls?

Funny.

I often play TTS with a friend's daughters, one of whom just turned 11.

She's the one usually suggesting the game, because she often wins.

 

[Letthewookieewin]

A) It is an opinion. It may be an opinion that is alien to you, but it is still an opinion. Your claim of "pure and simple" could not be farther from the truth. It is the way they saw it.

The reviewers were remiss in that they did not do their research well. It is evidence of the poor state of journalism in the United States. They were unqualified researchers. A little bit of research could have spared them the attempt at trying games, and allowed them to stick with games for the masses.

B) Even if you were right, which you are not, the response is still nerd rage. Justified nerd rage is still nerd rage. This is unjustified nerd rage. But even justified nerd rage sends the message that gamer geeks avoid sunlight for a reason.

The comments about the review were no different in flavor than anything you would get from a highly politically charged article. Nerd Rage is a silly label no worse than 'political rage', or 'team rage'. I have heard fans of sports franchises argue with the same vitriol as gamers about topics they care about. That is the key, caring about topics. Nerd Rage carries such a stigma with it that it is easy to throw around in an insulting way.

The reviewers deserved most if not all of the comments they received.

 

[slwoyach]

This isn't a serious game article, it's a throw away piece about a bunch of people at a newspaper playing a few board games. They judged them solely on whether or not they had a good time. Even arguing about it makes you look bad, because it's not important to the people who wrote the article. They don't care.

 

[Mark Chance]

Sometimes I'm ashamed to be a gamer. Those comments are akin to two geeks having a slap-fest in the middle of a mall about who's better: Kirk or Picard.

What's to slap about? Kirk's better. Duh.

 

[Letthewookieewin]

Sometimes I'm ashamed to be a gamer. Those comments are akin to two geeks having a slap-fest in the middle of a mall about who's better: Kirk or Picard.

Yet again I would ask how is that any worse than two hockey fans having a slap fest about whether the Devils or Rangers are better, while in the middle of the mall.

No difference. One group has a stigma aginst it and the other doesn't. I for one am not ashamed at being a gamer at all, and never have been.

 

[davethegame]

It is an opinion. It may be an opinion that is alien to you, but it is still an opinion. Your claim of "pure and simple" could not be farther from the truth. It is the way they saw it.

It's also an opinion that goes against the consensus, both among gamer and non-gamer organizations, as a board game that has won tons of awards, is on lots of recommended lists, and so on, and is consistently listed as a "gateway" game.

I don't think labeling something an opinion removes it from criticism, especially in the face of other evidence.

 

[malraux]

This isn't a serious game article, it's a throw away piece about a bunch of people at a newspaper playing a few board games. They judged them solely on whether or not they had a good time. Even arguing about it makes you look bad, because it's not important to the people who wrote the article. They don't care.

The fact that they don't care is kinda a problem. Presumably they were paid to write the article. It appeared in a real newspaper. Saying that the writers didn't care enough to do their job properly is a legitimate complaint. If the opinion were just some dude with a blog, then yeah, whatever. This is the equivalent of a movie reviewer rating Transformers highly and panning movies like Up or Public Enemies.

 

[nightwyrm]

It's a poorly researched article, there's no doubt about that, but there's a ton of crap articles out there anyways.

I keep imagining the writers trying to learn and play all seven games in one sitting, leading to the poor review.

 

[Crothian]

No difference. One group has a stigma aginst it and the other doesn't. I for one am not ashamed at being a gamer at all, and never have been.

The stigma is the difference. Like it or not, fair or not; the reality is that they are different because society says so.

 

[Letthewookieewin]

The stigma is the difference. Like it or not, fair or not; the reality is that they are different because society says so.

Right I agree with that. I worded that poorly.

My point is that the gamers that responded to the article did not demonstrate behavior that you would not find in any other group of people. Especially on the internet.