Boardgames more popular than videogames?

[diaglo]

Monopoly is a board game. So is Trivial Pursuit.

what do you consider Scrabble?
or Pictionary?
or Checkers/Draughts?
or Chess?
or Backgammon?

 

[Goodsport]

The difference between video games and board games is that dropping 30 bucks on a board game might give you a game you play for the rest of your life. Dropping 50 you can get a PS2 game which you won't be playing in 6 months.

True (at least for most video games). But on the flip side, most video games can be played single-player, while most board games can't.

Board games simply collect dust on the shelf if there's no one around to play them with.


-G

 

[JoeGKushner]

* Axis and Allies (and variants): Haven't played any of these in a while. Risk is easier and quicker!

* Axis and Allies Miniatures: another thing I haven't checked out.

* RoboRally (yay!): Man, my review on this little gem is way overdue.

* Nexus Ops: Fun yet simple game with some strategy going on there.

* Monsters Menace America: Lot of factors to chance in determining the winner, but it's a fun stomp and has some great illustrations thanks to Ron Spencer.

* Sword and Skull: Not a lot of depth in this one, but it's quick, fun, and easy to play.

* Betrayal at House on the Hill: Haven't checked it out yet.

* Risk: Ah, the classic. Lots of Risk variants I've been playing like Godstorm and 2120.

* Diplomacy: Nope, haven't played this one.Cheers![/QUOTE]

 

[ShadowDenizen]

Maybe in the 80's: but AH has definitely moved towards the more accessible end of the board-game market.

I don't doubt that board games could be huge. Unfortunately, there haven't been many innovations in the mass market in the last few years. They concentrate too much on "Lord of the Rings Risk" and "Simpsons Clue" and "Star Wars Monopoly" They can only rehash that stuff so many times.

Sure, there are lots of things like the stuff you listed, but board-gaming really is in a renaissance right now.

There's been tons of new games released within the last few years that have totally won me over, and not all of them are "Euro-Games" either.

To name a few, try:
*Shadows Over Camelot
*Betrayal at House on the Hill
*Runebound (Soon to have a "Midnight" expansion!!!)
*Arkham Horror
*War of the Ring

Not to mention that I still play some older games, like "Acquire", "Fortress America", and "Axis and Allies".

And the good ol' standbys, like "Puerto Rico", "Carcassone", "Settler of Catan", etc.

And there's more stuff poised to come out soon...
They've already reprinted "Robob Rally" and "Great Dalmuti" and they're soon to be reprinting "Fury of Dracula" (YAY!!), and "Ra", and the new "Descent" looks pretty cool. AND there's another expansion for both the "Game of Thrones" boardgame, AND the "War of the Ring" boardgame.

So yeah, board-gaming is up there on my list of things to do, second only to D+D.

 

[Frostmarrow]

I don't doubt that board games could be huge. Unfortunately, there haven't been many innovations in the mass market in the last few years. They concentrate too much on "Lord of the Rings Risk" and "Simpsons Clue" and "Star Wars Monopoly" They can only rehash that stuff so many times.

There's lots of nifty games out there, but you have to go to the little high end specialty shops to find them...at least around my area.

The games you mention are not meant to be played at all. So who buys them, you ask. People who buy presents!

Face it, if your grandson loves Star Wars - he's probably gonna like Star Wars monopoly. So you buy it for him. Perhaps you even play it at the birthday party but other than that it's going to sit on a shelf. But who cares, you brought a gift and grandson said he liked it.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

The difference between video games and board games is that dropping 30 bucks on a board game might give you a game you play for the rest of your life. Dropping 50 you can get a PS2 game which you won't be playing in 6 months.

I've played Final Fantasy 6 on and off for more than a decade, same with Heroes of Might and Magic (and, admittedly, its two sequels) and X-Com UFO Defense. I'm sure the same will be true of Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri when it turns ten. As for PS2 games, I've replayed Wild ARMs 3 and Suikoden 3 at least once after having them (and finishing them) at least 6 months before, so they're on the right track.

With that said, I, too love boardgames and consider this a great development.

 

[JoeGKushner]

In terms of cost, some of those board games are way up there. I think the Runebound/quest from Fantasy Flight Games is $70 but it comes with some awesome pieces.

And yeah, Shadows Over Camelot is a great game. I love the co-op play you have in it as oppose dto playing against one another. Very innovative.

 

[I'm A Banana]

The last twelve months?

Pthbbbt.

The game companies have all been too hard at work making their Next Gen systems to bugger with putting out great games. Once the new Legend of Zelda comes out.....

In addition, if we only played games for six months, back-compatability wouldn't be an issue (and it is), and Nintendo wouldn't be contemplating allowing gamers to download 8 and 16 bit games onto their next gen system.

Those who started playing videogames are growing up, hitting nostalgia, and loving what has come before. With the exception of Nintendo (whose love of new toys knows no limit), gaming has largely been entrenching itself in certain genres. Methinks innovation and invention is still possible.

But, heck, videogames take $200+ to get into. Board games take $20. A good boardgame can be an impulse buy. A videogame is an *investment*

 

[scadgrad]

HUGE board gamer here, it's common ground for the wife and I since she detests most RPGs, but loves other games.

I just have to say that I'm excited that WotC might be considering jumping into the mix. It's a tall order from where I sit though. They'll have to compete w/ Days of Wonder, Rio Grande, and FG for my money. All three of those companies would have delivered a far better version of Betrayal at House on the Hill and for that reason I remain skeptical of WotC's commitment to the market. Don't get me wrong, I love Betrayal and think it's a damn fine game (one of my current faves), but its production/ art direction is total 5$$. I'd wager the cover alone has turned more than just a few potential players away. Monsters Menace America is also fun, but looks "cheap" compared to the competition, and appears to have a few too many flaws.

From where I sit, Days of Wonder is the company to beat, w/ Rio Grande coming in a close second. FFG does a fine job as well and they get quite a bit of my board game money, but I think they've yet to hit a home run like Memoir '44, Ticket to Ride, Puerto Rico, etc. that being said, their production values are exceedingly sweet. Arkham Horror is just a flat out gorgeous game and if they do follow up w/ a Midnight version of Runebound... drool, drool...

 

[Col_Pladoh]

AH has put out some very good games recently. Risk 2210 A.D. being one of them. Personally I would like to see them bring back Titan.

I'll agree that board games are in for a renaissance. My gaming group has shifted to playing Settlers of Catan every week, even our non-gamer wives join in. RPGs have become a once a month event now.

\Pity that!

We play RPGs on Thursday evenings and boardgames on Wednesday mornings or Friday afternoons...or both days if my son has the time free from work. As Tom Wham is a regular we get to play his designs a lot or the excellent German boardgames he has in his library such as Power Grid

Anyway, the number of persons playing computer games versus paper boardgames isn't really the crux of the matter. As someone noted initially, it is the sales volume that matters, and there computer games wins hands down. With more families sure to own home computers in the coming years, I would not want to wager against computer games versus boardgames of the paper variety.

As an aside, I am about to order the reprint of the original 1949 Clue game, do not plan on buying any computer games at all, but my son Alex sure does make up for that

Cheers,
Gary