This is a question that has mainly come up on my reviews when I post them over on on Board Game Geek. It is a good way to for a lot of people to see a review, but there are also people who claim that you need to play a board game a certain number of times before you can write a review on it. But is there really a minimum number of times before you review a game?

What’s The Answer?

Super simple answer is no. There is no minimum number of times. I know the first time I played Gloomhaven and Tainted Grail that I liked them a lot. Now I didn’t play them only once before giving them a review, but I could have basically done it at that point. The same with Concept, I knew I didn’t like that game after one slightly too long play of it.

Why, because those games show you how they work right away. You sit down and you play Gloomhaven, you know how the card play is going to work. Tainted Grail, you get an idea of the exploration and combat immediately. Concept, you get the concept of the game right away as well.

Other games, it will take longer. That’s why I’ve started doing the Beyond the Box Cover articles as well. Something like Isle of Cats, there is a lot to explore in the game and mess around with. I want to make sure that there isn’t just a better strategy than others. I also want to figure out how much the drafting will swing things. Or Railroad Ink. I can tell you how much I like the base game, but I need to play with the expansions that come in the box.

But Story Games Need the Whole Story

This is another thought that is thrown around as to why you need to play more. I’ve read a ton of books, I’ve played a number of story games. I can tell when sitting down if I will like a story. Now, the story might underwhelm or surprise me, but I have a general idea. And no, I don’t need to know how the story ends. The end of a story can dampen how much I like that story, but unlikely to flat out ruin it.

For example, not in board games, I think that the story in the Witcher TV show is alright at best. However, I want to see that second season because there are elements that I like and I really like the world. In board games, the story in Gloomhaven is solid, nothing amazing, but the rest of the world and the game play itself mean that I absolutely love that game. And with a game, so much of how well a story works is the tone it sets with the mechanics. And I don’t need to critique a whole story to know if I like the mechanics.

But You Need to Play All the Content

Again, I’ll disagree with this premise. I think that playing a lot of the content is probably smart. Again, that’s why I do the Beyond the Box Cover. However, some games, Merchant’s Cove for example, I can give a review on without playing the whole thing. Why, because I can see other people playing characters with me, and I get the general idea of the game as a whole. I still want to play those other characters, but I don’t need to, to know about the game.

In fact, Merchant’s Cove is a great example, I really liked playing the Innkeeper. I want to try the other characters, but I know I can go back and play the Innkeeper again and still enjoy the game. So who knows, maybe I’ll hate the Blacksmith, that’s fine because if I don’t want to play one out of 8 characters, I still have a lot to play.

And again, I know that I like the mechanics of the game, and in particular the ones that go across all characters. I like the loading meeples onto ships. I like the townsfolk that you can recruit. The scoring of with making and selling goods, I like. I like the corruption. All of those things in Merchants Cove work across the board.

Why Do People Push Back?

I think in the end, we have to talk about why people push back. It’s because people forget that a lot of this is opinion. Tom Vassel talks about this a lot when he doesn’t like something. Just because he doesn’t like a game doesn’t mean that someone won’t have it as their favorite game. A board game review is an opinion of the reviewer.

So why do people make a big deal about it? This tends to happen when people have a low opinion or a really high opinion. Though, there is a third category of people who push back, and that is if a game is too popular. I can find myself falling into the trap of that where I won’t play a game because it is too popular. Now, I will play it, but I won’t buy it. And I tend to be more hesitant.

Basically if we have a strong emotion towards a game, whether love or hate or annoyance of it being everywhere, we will have higher standards for reviews. We are going to want people to agree with us. So we push back on it because we think if they play it more or they must have played it wrong, and that’s why they do or don’t like the game.

So What’s the Point of Reviews?

The point is that you can find people who review whom your tastes match up with. And a good reviewer talks not only about their feelings around a game, but also the mechanics and what does and doesn’t work for them. That means you get not only an idea of the flavor of the game but how the game works.

For example, I know that when he was on the Dice Tower, Sam Healey and my taste matched up pretty well. So I could generally know if he liked a game, then I’d like the game as well. He’s no longer on the Dice Tower, had to move away, so now I don’t know who I would put in that realm. But now I also know my tastes better, so I tend to go more with thoughts off of playthroughs.

Who is that reviewer for you whom you like their reviews? Is there any channel or reviewer who is the best for you or maybe you know is the opposite of your tastes?

Email us at nerdologists@gmail.com
Message me directly on Twitter at @TheScando
Visit us on Facebook here.
Support us on Patreon here.