I think there are some other reasons why people don't like Shadowrun Crossfire that weren't mentioned here: A lot of people complained that there wasn't enough mission variety in the original game and that it was a very slow (too slow) grind to get upgrades. Some people don't want to play a game so many times in order to upgrade their character. A game like Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, which was a contemporary of Shadowrun Crossfire, I feel, allows its players to upgrade their characters and/or their items (deck) far more frequently.
Personally didn't like it because it had Game Over cards: either from the crossfire deck or from the enemy deck. Some of them nullify your upgrades. It's really fun grinding to upgrade your starting hand to 7 and drawing: discard down to 2 cards. Yeah, really fun!
I didn’t like the fact that the decks were constant. Unlike pathfinder, where I would change the cards in my character’s deck, with Shadowrun: Crossfire, you always start with the same basic deck-or maybe that was an upgrade?-I never got far enough to find out.
As Richard has pointed out: The number of missions in Shadowrun: Crossfire is higher than the 1 in, say, Pandemic. Do people complain that Pandemic has only one mission?
There is A DEFINITE elitist, (takes the hobby way too seriously), culture on the BGG boards and therefore the ratings will skew low. (Check the forums for ample examples of humourless, didactic, overly analytical, comments and discussions). I've played a number of great games that rate low because the comments indicate the game's 'beneath' them- sorta what you described in talking about Bomb Squad: Too many there take playing games as serious work. I've had too many experiences with militant, condescending, "serious" gamers. If you want proof, just look at the comments here already!! LMAO.
A big thumbs-up for showing the game in question while you talk about it! Saves me from rummaging in my memory department or opening up a second browser window to refresh my own thoughts and recollections about the game. Way to go for your next top 10 list videos :)
I dismiss Shadowrun Crossfire because the encounters are wildly imbalanced. Plus character progression is so slow (and unrewarding) and the way they handle character elimination is one of the most convoluted messes I've ever seen. I hope the new version normalizes the difficulty curve because I do like coops and I do like deck builders. I know as I'm writing this you'll dismiss it out of hand, but I know many who should like this and found the experience punishing and unfun.
Every one of these points are fair and on point. Everything you just said is my biggest gripes about SC. I got the game on Richard's recommendation (I think it was the second game I bought when I started buying games, Pathfinder ACG being the first) and I still love the game. Sure, I put the box up 15 minutes after the long setup sometimes because I'm so frustrated with the draw and the first few games were very punishing, but after a couple of upgrades, man this game is rewarding after puzzling it out and beating it. Also, having a second brain and set of eyes is almost like playing a different game than playing solo.
@divided123 I actually meant a long setup when you rage throw it back in the box after playing for 10 minutes. lol I know there are plenty of much longer setups out there.
For me one thing that messed up my enjoyment of Spirits of the Rice Paddy was how the rules limited the overall water supply, so I ended up with a game where my opponent basically managed to hog all the water for most of the game, choosing deliberately not to empty it out at times even though it hurt him because it hurt me more, and there wasn't much water left in the overall supply to actually fulfill the rain cards. Because of it I decided to ignore the water limitations for my next game, because that experience just wasn't fun at all... and then it just didn't get back to the table. I however agree with you on Subdivision. Got it absolutely dirt cheap after watching the runthrough, and I really enjoy it. Should try to get it back to the table soon, it's really been too long.
Kashgar is not a deckbuilder because you don't have decks (which are random by definition), but rather a queue builder. ;-) There are real reasons why this isn't higher. For one, you can never play more than one card per turn, so you never get the rush of playing multiple card combos. Two, your queues can get incredibly long and it can take forever to cycle through to your cool cards. Three, cards that actually do thin out your deck are overpowered because if your opponent gets one early and you don't, it becomes very hard for you to win. Four, if you get a winning combo going, you'll win the game, but the gameplay until then will be incredibly dull. Play card A, play card B, A, B, A, B, A, win. Yey... These drawbacks are only apparent when you play the game multiple times, which is why many reviewers give this great reviews. They likely don't play this enough to find its flaws.
Isn’t it just a deck you can see? Sure it’s spread out but it’s function is exactly the same, putting cards in the bottom and “drawing” from the top. As for thinning you should also keep one deck small and powerful.
@@jareduxr The point of a deck is that it's randomized and you don't know what you're drawing, so the function is not the same. Also, you have no hand. You just trigger one of the cards that's on top. A faceup pile of cards that is never shuffled is a queue. It doesn't change anything regarding whether you like the game or not, but calling it a deckbuilder might give people the wrong impressions.
Marco Schaub I don’t think a deck of cards as a rule must be face down or shuffled. Cambridge dictionary defines a deck as “a set of cards used for playing card games.” So your personal definition is a bit more specific and exclusive. Other deckbuilder games like Aeon’s End have little or no shuffling. Shuffling often comes with deck builders but it’s not required. They are basically three separate sets of cards, you may only draw a card from the top and add to the bottom, you normally may not take the top card and put it in a different set, you may not normally change the order of the cards. Players often try to get different sets of cards to function for a specific purpose (resource generation, resource exchange, contracts, etc). Sounds like a set or deck to me, despite the different presentation.
randomized cards if a feature of a deck, but not a requirement. another good example is ryan lauket's city of iron, where you have control over the order of cards in the deck :)
I completely agree with you about Shadowrun: Crossfire. Fantastically underrated games. It does have problems and issues, and is a much much better game with High Caliber Ops. My favorite aspect of the game (other than the Shadowrun theme) is that it absolutely forces you to make decisions that do not seem logical at first glance. It takes a while to get new people into it, but get a game or two under their belts and it gets its claws in them. Many people think that several of the crossfire cards are instant lose cards. Many of them seem like that at first, but if you make some unconventional moves you can overcome them. We just had a game this weekend where we were squeaking through the 2nd scene of Pandemic. Entered the 3rd scene with 9HP between 4 runners (OUCH!), and a crossfire level of 5 (bad black market flips -- 3 9¥ cards clogging up the market for a while). Talked the Drone Rigger in the 4th seat into buying Black Market Contacts during their scene buy (they had just reached 9¥ with a rocket launcher sitting in the market), promising that 2 of us could kill something before their turn. Managed to barely kill them, letting the Drone Rigger buy the rocket launcher in the middle of their turn, which was then used to prevent 11! points of damage by moving obstacles.
We thought for sure we were toast going into the 3rd scene and were about to give it up, but with an uncommon play -- we don't use Black Market Contacts at the table very much, the Drone Rigger was able to turn it around for us. They were looking at 6 obstacles at the end of their turn, but we had more turns available to whittle them down before the Drone Rigger got to go again. I completely agree with your view of Shadowrun: Crossfire. Fantastic game. By far my most played game of the past couple of years. I've played it an order of magnitude more times than any other game.
Nice review as always, Rahdo. Thanks for sharing your opinion on games, which are not so popular. Personally, I don't get board games based on BGG rating, I get them based on what I think I would like to play and what I think would feel good when played. This is why I like your videos - they bring out the feeling of a game being played and show the smoothness and the playing process of a few turns. BTW is that Forbidden sky?
I think you're right about the limited distribution of Habitats being a contributing factor for it not ranking higher. After hearing good things about it I've been searching the past few weeks for an affordable place to buy it. I finally found a someone online selling a dented/dinged copy for $38 shipped, and had it sitting in my shopping cart the past day or two trying to decide if it was worth the price. Thanks to you Rahdo, once you said that this game is giving Glen Moore a run for its money and is easily in your top 10 tile laying games, I immediately paused the video, switched tabs, and pulled the trigger to buy Habitats. Thanks Rahdo!
Kashgar will definitely climb with the English release! I think... I hope. Maybe the theme will still keep some away? Live this game! Maybe a re-theming would push it up a lot of people'a lists? I pasted up the German version and still may get the English release 😁
When you compare your ranking with everyone elses you should take into account that you automatically don't like 50% of the games because there is too much conflict in them and almost exclusively play games that work with 2 players.
This, I enjoy Radho's content and I have nothing but respect for him as a game developer, but I always take his reviews of competitive games with a grain of salt because of his bias. I'm not saying it's BAD... some people don't like some types of games, I'm not going to fault him for it - but a reviewer needs to be impartial when looking at a game and not falling victim to their own personal feelings.
Ryan McGechaen I disagree there. I think it’s important to know peoples biases to make an informed decision. Since there is no such thing as being impartial since all opinions are subjective I think it’s great he’s open about his biases. Many reviewers are not as open (or don’t have the personal insight required) to inform the viewer of their bias, thereby requiring the viewer to first “get to know them”. The most important thing to know when researching board games is how your tastes align with the reviewer. Because that will let you gauge how much stock you should put in their opinion.
Maybe true, but that's not related to the content of this video. This is about games that he likes not ones that he hates, so I'm not sure how you made this comment unless you didn't watch.
a few months ago, i did do a top10 overrated games video, but it's only available on my patreon page for folks who back at the $2/month level (you can just back for one month, watch everything, and then cancel though) :) patreon.com/rahdo is the site if you're interested
well here's a link to my stats page: boardgamegeek.com/user/rahdo/stats if you replace 'rahdo' with whatever your bgg user name is in that URL, you'll get to yours! :)
One thing I noticed about a lot of the games on this list is the swing and miss when it comes to art and aesthetics. There are so many gorgeous games coming out these days and I think that art is something a game ignores at its peril. Some of them are shocking in how much of a missed opportunity they are, Spirits of the rice paddies for example could have been so gorgeous and it just dropped the ball.
But the real question still stands: What are games you don't like but BGG? And what are your reasons for that? This top10 is a bit one-sided. I see why, but it would be really interesting to get another step out and talk about the reasons you don't like the games everyone else seems to adore so much. Especially with your knowledge about GameMechanics and Playstiles.
a few months ago, i did do a top10 overrated games video, but it's only available on my patreon page for folks who back at the $2/month level (you can just back for one month, watch everything, and then cancel though) :) patreon.com/rahdo is the site if you're interested
I hate in the year of the dragon because it is a lesson in sado-masochism. I suspect I would dislike peloponnes for the same reason based on your description.
Me and my husband, we LOVE Shadowrun Crossfire. It’s one of our favorites. We really don’t understand people saying it is unbeatable. As a matter of fact, we have been winning on a strike for 15+ games. But then, to be fair, we usually win when playing coops (we’ve never lost a game of Space Hulk: Death Angel). Shadowrun Crossfire is amazing! And watching your runthrough following the designer’s game was mind-opening for us. It is, like Legends of Andor, a fully cooperative game that must be played as such. We are a team, not individual characters. To me, the game is close to perfection.
Bianca Pinheiro If you’ve never lost a game of SH:DA, there is no chance that you’ve played correctly ;) Out of 100 plays, I’m at a 72% win rate (which I think is crazy high after tons of practice/learning).
I don't know about BGG, but a thing that happens to me sometimes is that I watch you having lots of fun with a game and when I get it its not so fun for me :/.
I picked up Apocalypse Chaos for £10 a few years ago so was glad it wasn't too popular that day. It is very thinky, almost like an abstract in how many moves ahead you have to think. The rulebook was a bit unclear in parts as well, so people prob knock a mark off for that as well
about kashgar. i dont play competitive card games at all. they turn me off thematically and component wise. i want board in my games. in general, a central board help ppl focus somewhere and watch how everyone is doing easily
There's certainly a flaw in the BGG rating/ranking system, in that (despite clear markers & explanations) people don't use it consistently to mean the same thing; explicitly, each person's rating is *meant to be* a measure of their own feelings about how much/often they personally feel like playing the game-yet some people choose to ignore that guidance and use their ratings for other things (e.g.: their opinion of the quality of the game, or as a way to game/politicize the rankings of high-visibility games and/or features). Rahdo, it sounds like you, while being aware of the stated intention of the ratings, are still thinking of the aggregated ratings/ranking as being *entirely* a measure of "how good a game is"-that you're interpreting a lower BGG rating/ranking as meaning the BGG community thinks the game isn't a good game. Except that isn't what the ratings mean [when people use them correctly]. I could see/play a game which, while being an amazingly well-designed game with beautiful art, quality components, and a clear rulebook, is a style [or difficulty] of game I don't personally enjoy and I would have to give it a low rating-because I don't want to play it. If there were a separate field to give the game a rating based on my opinion of its quality (and really, at that point I'd want separate ratings for things like mechanics, art, rules, components, complexity, et cetera) I might give the game a very high score-but I still wouldn't want to play it. A significant number of your "Final Thoughts" videos where you say a game isn't for you still say similar things: That you can see that it's a great, well-designed/beautiful/etc game, but that it doesn't fit your play style. As a critic (which I know you don't want to be) you might give it a high score, but on the BGG scale you'd give it a low score. In summary: These games aren't underrated, there's nothing "unfair" about their ratings/rankings being low-but the average community member of BGG happens to disagree with you about what sorts of games they find fun and want to play more. I don't have a link to hand right now, but this data can actually be *helpful* if mined properly-I recall seeing, once upon a time, a way to easily see games which I hadn't played/rated but which were highly rated by other people whose ratings were similar to mine; that is, when ratings are used correctly the BGG community self-identifies its own sub-communities, within which your opinions are shared and you can more easily find more games you'll love than if you look at the site as a whole.
Teel McClanahan This post is do self-contradictory! Use the rates ha correctly and it shows how much people like the game. You say that, then contradict that!
Herbaceous, Harbour and the latest group of roll-n-writes are on the top of my list. I'll dismiss the dice games (Istanbul, Castles of Burgundy, Steamrollers, No Siesta) as they are relatively new and may someday find an audience, but come on - Herbaceous and Harbour are fantastic tight and stressful gateway games. I'm sure the gateway is a big part the issue, but both offer more real gamer strategy than the Ticket to Rides of the gaming world.
I really will never understand why gamers in every part of the world always forget to notice Bruno Cathala's co-designers! Even in France! I know Bruno Cathala is often the most famous of the two, but it would be so nice to have both names given for every game that involves co-designers. I do agree on the Habitats game, and Kashgar, but for this one, I think that's due to the TLDR phenomenon that hinders people from playing games with large trunks of text on the cards. Especially if you consider people often only play once or twice a game before they go to the next. Not worth investing so much time.
that is a fair point, all i can say is it's human nature to gravitate to the 'celeb' in a collaboration. hard not to, but you're right, i should do better!
rahdo Syl and I had the german version from the beginning and never looked really for the english version but now you mentioned Grail Games I do remember it wasn’t Kosmos who published the english version.
Got it from Grail Games, so amazing, everything I've introduced it to has absolutely fell in love with it. Kind of want more, but tons of stuff in the box as it stands:)
I think that you're spot on about Subdivision, Rahdo, especially since the game was first billed as depicting the construction of a single hex tile of Suburbia (presumably the suburbs common tile), creating the natural expectation (for me at least) that there would be more diverse types of lower-level buildings to construct and decisions to make (e.g. should I put the community pool next to the police station?). After consulting many reviews, I avoided it for some time, until I got a chance to snatch it on mega-sale to see if I'd enjoy it in its own right, with those initial expectations gone. And yes, I did ... as more of a successor to Feudality than Suburbia. It seems to be a pattern with Bezier Games; The Palace of Mad King Ludwig seems to be more of a descendant of Carcassonne: The City than its similarly named predecessor.
Peleponnes is indeed unfairly treated. Every single time I bring it to a game con, it is played every time, all the time. That's proof enough for me. SR XF seems to get a new edition I read somewhere, would need to check that out.
Just want to say SOS Titanic was sold out everywhere when it first came out almost immediately, so I think it’s definitely the print run issue more than anything else.
Yeah, this is my assumption as well. I've had it on my "want in trade" list forever b/c it's so difficult to find (at least at a reasonable price). Hopefully this will give it a little boost so someone would consider another print run.
I should have watched this video earlier... I just asked you yesterday about Shadowrun Crossfire, and here it is hahaha. And yes, the BGG rating system is kinda strange, I don't even understand my own ratings sometimes... I rated Shadowrun 7.4, and I actually DO like it a lot... I think I need to review my ratings every now and then to reflect my updated views on gaming as a whole.
I don't think there is a stigma against co-op games. They just are a lot harder to balance and create. Not to mention the people that specifically play co-ops are okay with a 40% win rate, the average gamer likes to win around 60-70% of the time.
David Thurling Maybe but the people that will enjoy sitting around a table puzzling out efficiency probably don’t mind the label, especially as being a geek has become part of pop culture (super hero movies, Harry Potter, Star Wars, etc)
JW G. My point is that many dont. Why does boardgaming have to be geeky? Maybe its a throwback to the days when students played DnD. It’s certainly not a reflection of the modern hobby.
I agree there is still stigma with board games. Especially if there is any miniatures involved. As to your point yes, it may deter a lot of people but I don't care if anyone calls me a geek. I think whatever your hobby is or whatever you're into, you're a geek for that. Even if it's running marathons. You're a marathon geek. But good lord, you talk about solo gaming and people get this look of pity in their eyes like "oh honey, you don't have anyone to play with?" Sometimes I reply "Do you read books with your friends or by yourself?"
I also like some of these games. Bomb Squad is fun to play sometimes, but the theme doesn't fit at all (which I feel is where it suffers in reception). Also, I personally feel that one should NOT enter a rating unless they have played it at least once.
As much as I love Bohnanza, Duel just didn’t do it for me. The bonus cards are just so incredibly random...I’ve lost more than one game after an opponent lucked out and picked up bonus card after bonus card that they could immediately fulfill.
S.O.S. Titanic is definitely one I would have on my list too. I actually bought this one because of your recommendation a few years back and am very happy that the game was still available at the time. Shame that not everyone who wants it can get it easily now. I know of at least one person who has been looking for it at a reasonable price, but their hunt continues. heh ;-)
Sorry couldn't help but chuckle at the everyone hates on subdivision because it's not like it's more popular counterpart subdivision. And the constant mixing up of the names for that segment. haha Great piece there are many games i feel don't get a lot of love because of bgg rankings keeping them down so it was good to see a video like this.
Just for fun, I ran the stats on my ratings... mostly my rating is higher than BGG's, but #7 and #1 on this list are exceptions. Ignoring expansions and children's games, I get: 10. Project: ELITE (I love co-ops, and time pressure is a great way to make sure everyone needs to be involved... give breaks in between the timed phases, though, and suddenly you can discuss strategy with the other players again. So excited that this is getting a reprint!) 9. Favor of the Pharaoh (Basically I love dice games, and this is kind of Yahtzee with special powers and a dramatic ending.) 8. Aeon's End (The biggest thing I hate about deck builders is the constant shuffling of small decks. Flip over your deck instead? Yeah, that's a huge plus for me. Add in a fantasy theme, co-op play, and lots of cards that combo well with each other... this is right in my sweet spot.) 7. Star Wars: Imperial Assault (Never been a fan of the dungeon-in-a-box games and this one seemed to have absolutely nothing going for it other than the Star Wars theme.) 6. Ave Roma (Apparently Jen described it as "Just the right level of brain burn". I agree.) 5. Pandemic: The Cure (A dice game that captures the feel of Pandemic while playing quicker? Sign me up!) 4. Dead Panic (The theme works great for the mechanics of the Castle Panic series... endless hordes of zombies, coming right up.) 3. Wiz-War 8th Edition (My rating may have gotten a bump for nostalgia reasons.) 2. The Big Bang Theory: The Party Game (Apples to Apples is too boring and CAH is too dirty... this is just right.) 1. Lost: The Game (The only game I've ever rated a 1.)
Well, all these games look interesting, but just that, interesting. And, with so many excellent games the last decade or so, simply being interesting just won't make the cut for most of us. This is one of the cases that I really think that the 2.9K people that have rated Shadowrun, for example, have actually created an honest average. It's not bad, not for me anyway, but not that good for the majority. Anyway, thank you for a nice video as always!
Interesting topic. I did this my self and had 3 games and one was an expansion. Star Trek panic (Mine 9 BGG 6.03) Yes isn't for everyone I know. I just loved the theme and the challenge right off the bat. Race for the Galaxy (Me 5 BGG 7.67) The iconography was really hard to get into. Roll for the galaxy was much easier to grasp. Arkham horror the Card game (Me 5 BGG 7.919) Well I was eager to get but found it lackluster. The whole idea of upgrading was intriguing but I found it cumbersome. matter of opinion of course. CV Gossip (me 8 BGG 5.8) it's and expansion to a decent dice chucker. It adds to an already good game that adds more things to add and a few twists along the way. the gossip aspect doesn't work as well but the added Fate cards added something cool if you rolled bad luck. I'll have to look at habitats. Looks interesting. Suburbia is still my favorite of the 'Sub' games.
If I use that bgg feature. The top 10 would be: 1) Dead Last, 2) Mage Knight, 3) Loopin Louie, 4) Descent 2E, 5) Sentinels of the Multiverse, 6) Paperback, 7) Monopoly Gamer, 8) Jamaica, 9) Eminent Domain, 10) Through the Ages. They're all games I've rated 1-4. XD
the link is www.boardgamegeek.com/collection/user/rahdo?rated=1&ff=1&sort=delta&sortdir=desc&columns=title%7Cbggrating%7Crating&hiddencolumns=delta but you need to change 'rahdo' with your own bgg name :)
I’m not sure if it the BGG rankings so much as how people use the BGG rankings. For games that I can appreciate, but don’t really like, I would rate them as a 6 or maybe as high as a 7 (kinda like it sorta). If I rate a game as low as a 4 or a 2 then I REALLY don’t like it.
Good opinion, I agree with you. And way too many people use dumb hate votes like a "1". This is the biggest problem of the BGG ranking system. Other than that it's fine. It's just the users that got to man up and use it more wisely.
I have not played apocalypse chaos but its one that I would like to get. I get the impression from reviews that it only plays well with 2 players so the other reviewers were not as keen
I wish the discrepancy function on BGG used average rating instead of the Geek Rating which is heavily weighted against games that haven't been rated as much. Using the geek rating can make the discrepancy look very misleading. A much maligned game could score higher than a game that has reviewed very well but is just a hidden gem. For example, Shadow Run Crossfire has a 7.24 average rating which is a pretty decent score vs a 6.7 geek rating which is more than half a point lower and puts it behind a number of other games in geek rating that have average ratings that are much lower (like Forbidden Island with an average rating of 6.83 but with considerably more votes and a geek rating of 6.74) .
I do think the Geek rating is a reasonable compromise for creating a single number used to rank the games... but when a person is looking into how good a game is, the ranking using that single number isn't as useful as looking at BOTH the average rating and the number of ratings. This list basically consists entirely of games that aren't well known or that people just aren't interested in trying. Shadowrun: Crossfire has the most ratings, with almost 3,000... but because of that, it's also the only game on the list that is ranked in the top 1,000 on BGG. SOS Titanic has the second most ratings on this list, with about 1,250. The only other game above 1,000 ratings here is Subdivision, and that just barely. Even Bohnanza: The Duel only has 585 ratings, and that despite the fact that the parent game has over 32,000.
Oh, and yes... the discrepancy function should absolutely use average rating. Given that you've rated it, the best comparison with other people's ratings is the average opinion of other people that have actually rated it. The "dummy" ratings thrown in for the Geek rating simply make no sense in this context.
Also, I hadn't realized that #2 was a combo... Peloponnes Card Game is indeed below 1,000 ratings, but the original Peloponnes has just under 2,500 ratings and thus is also in the top 1,000 by ranking. And I've always used the top 1,000 ranked games as a good rule-of-thumb for very solid, playable games... exact personal rankings are simply a matter of taste, but getting in the top 1,000 on BGG is an accomplishment in itself.
I actually think your critique of the BGG rating system is WAY more interesting than your specific list of games. It's not a coincidence that most of the games on your list are co-op. Most people want a game where you play competitive and the BGG system explicitly encourages people not to vote on game-quality, but on how likely they are to play the game. I don't really fance co-op or solitaire games either, but I see the same problem with grand wargames. Many people vote some of the games, regardless of of brilliant they are made or how good they are for players who want to put the time and effort into it very low - and they do that solely because they don't want to put time and effort into them. That's especially bad for grand wargames which non-grognards know exists, since they still vote on them. Games like "Empires in Arms" have gotten many more low votes than other less quality wargames, since people who have just tried a few turn will vote it down solely for the time it takes to play the (otherwise great) game. BGG should have a rating factor for game design quality. Where your personal likely hood to play the game was not a factor, but where objective assessment of game mechanisms and game design within its genre was the metric.
This might seem odd coming from me since I can be critical of games that a LOT of others really like, but I will say that board game opinions from players are some of the most widely spread out over the spectrum of love or hate.
Funnily enough, my 3 biggest discrepancies are with games that I disliked compared to games that are popular on BGG ( Descent 2.0, The Pillars of the Earth and Dixit )
Wow, that was fun! We're just getting into Co-ops, (Pandemic, Forbidden Desert) so Shadow Run Crossfire is on the want list. I think Zooloretto is underrated, as is the dice game...
Actually, except for Bonanza Duel (which I like), I have never played any of those games. And as I don't really like SF games (except some very special ones like Roll or Race), I won't play many of them (though Subdivision looks great). Maybe one really shouldn't look at where one's favorite games are on BGG
I have only played Kashgar with 4 players and it was a draaaag. Theme doesn't bother me, as most of my favourite games are euros. This may be one like a Grand Austria Hotel, where it's length with more players make it an issue. I really disliked Kashgar because I sat around doing nothing for large chunks of the game. I also felt that the luck elements of the card draw as to what was available to purchase really made it a not fun experience. Perhaps far better with 2 players.
I have around 200 rated games on BGG and I just went to see what are my underrated games. I have none. 0! :( On the other hand, I have 9 overrated games.
I'm so glad you have Paulo and don't have to sit and read all the negative comments about the goofs. The raw "sit and play" is why we love your videos, as you're fully aware. 🙂
BGG really likes coop deckbuilding Arkham Horror: The Card Game is rank 17. Arkham Horror has engagning and rewarding deckbuiling options between every game. Shadowrun lacks in the character progression and is also slow.
can't disagree with that. it's probably more the super high challenge level, plus i forgot to mention a lot of people hate the legacy-style stickers :)
With a limited budget it's hard not to take a peek and go for what's popular. If you skew towards Richard's tastes (more euro, less violence) this is a good list.
it's a "rahdo ramble" video, which is only available on my patreon page for folks who back at the $2/month level (you can just back for one month, watch everything, and then cancel though) :) patreon.com/rahdo is the site if you're interested
I assume that Palaces of Carrara is on that list for you as well. I think I rate the game slightly higher than you do but that is the game in my collection that I rank higher than BGG. I am willing to bet the low number of English language copies has something to do with the low ranking.
No, it was just bad marketing, raising false expectations. They marketed it as being a theme bomb with all the awesome looks etc, but in the end it's nothing else than a huge math puzzle. Title should be "The Rulers of Calculation: the Math Warriors strike back". Hate this game with a passion. And I am a Eurogamer and love my dry stuff. I am sorry.
I haven't played any of these and although not playing them I can't rate them....but if I turned off the sound and just look at the games on the screen, most of those 10 just don't look good, or theme isn't exciting, so I would just grab something else. So good games can be hurt by look & theme. I am sure there are more reasons on them but since I haven't played I can't comment, but guessing things you mentioned on some of them are good reasons they wouldn't rate higher. Love the videos though :-)
Obviously I can't speak for him, but Richard has to play a lot of pre-production games and I think that has made him look past the concept artwork and components and see the gameplay mechanics. Which is funny because he gets so into the story and things functioning logically. Myself I have been getting into print and play lately (lack of funds for the hobby) and it's very very hard for me to get into a mediocre game if the artwork isn't there. It really makes a huge difference to me.
I will say Jaipur is one of the most amazing games I have ever played (and my wife feels the same) and we have SUCH A HARD TIME getting this to the table for anyone else because they HATE the artwork. I think it fits after playing it but for people playing the first time they actually act like I have horrible judgement in what a good game is when I ask to play Jaipur.
Doesn't look like too much has changed with the new edition of Crossfire: ua-cam.com/video/1TZaj3QOb_Q/v-deo.html Minor class stat bumps and options for lower player counts to swap a higher card at the beginning but exhaustion tokens make healing criticals harder. I like this game but I don't find the cardplay as interesting as a game like Aeon's End. The character building is a lot of fun however.
SOS Titanic was at 4th place in my top 10 solo games list in 2017. It is an elegant game design through and through in every aspect. Highly recommended. I can relate to Rhado. Well but my highest disparity with BGG could give rhado a stroke. Its Gloomhaven.
Hmm...maybe it is since you only play 2P games so these games get under the radar.In addition,n while I liken cooperative games competitve gaming is what floats the boat for the majority I guess.
By an amazing coincidence my wife and I were just playing Crossfire last night. It's one of our favorites too. In fact, I was even saying that I know you have regrets about introducing the final thoughts portion of your runthroughs, but I am so glad you had it for Crossfire. I was pretty sure I would like it, but hearing you rave about how amazingly collaborative it is ,which doesn't always come through with one dude and a camera, is what tipped us over into giving it a try, and I'm so grateful. I kind of have mixed feelings about the prime runner edition too. I used to play it with a group of co-workers, and we probably were averaging a 70%-80% win rate. If I were still living around them, I'd probably be more inclined to scoff, but we've been playing a lot with just the two of us, and it really is a big step up in difficulty. I'd kind of love something to smooth out the difficulty curve a bit more at lower player counts.
Love the idea for the list. Considering you can often find Apocalypse Chaos for less than $20, it's a steal. I think some of the things against it is the terrible name. The art isn't great. Just a bit of effort and they could have really bumped stuff up. Like naming the heroes. Your videos and the designers videos convinced me to try Shadowrun: Crossfire. It's my most played game by a lot. I don't buy the argument about grinding. The solution is simple Start with 5 karma, or 10. Who cares. For the people who said it's too hard, it takes experience and you really have to get the correct card from the market instead of the best you can afford like the Legendary games. Also for the difficulty, I can't say this enough: Try the Extraction scenario. Or get Dragonfire, which is considerably easier.
Where is this 'minority pushback against cooperative games' is coming from? More than fifth in BGG Top 100 are cooperative games, that's huge compared to some years back :)
you can find it in these very comments from other posts who express their dislike for all things co-op. but i agree that it is a minority, and the tide is turning :)
I know this game was released last year, but I think Massive Darkness is an underrated game. I feel Sword and Sorcery is a little bit overrated, due to the fact that I wasn't able to get through the rules. Lol
I really, really wanted to love Massive Darkness and I need to try it again, but man alive, I felt like it was the fiddliest fiddle for what it was. Conversely, I loved Sword and Sorcery and thought it flowed pretty well, but I read the rulebook a few times before I cracked it open. I'm glad I still have MD because the minis are so cool, but I pray CMON can try a S2 with a rules redo.
@@Gutock Lol I felt that way about the D&D Adventure Games after playing Massive Darkness. But then I learned to appreciate the Adventure Games again. Sword and Sorcery I've always felt was a good replacement for campaign based Crawlers, I just found the rules/game management to be too much for solo play.
I think Massive Darkness has a hard time finding a home. Zombicide did well because a lot of casual and non-gamers will appreciate the theme. When you get dungeons, mages, and barbarians onto a table, it turns off a lot of people and what's left are the more hardcore gamers who want a game like Sword and Sorcery or even Gloomhaven instead of the casual rules of MD.
@@staticklingon2182 Which is ironic, as I love the casual rules and how it doesn't punish the player like the D&D Adventure Games or the Road to Legend app for Descent.
Oh I agree 100%. I love the casual-ness of it, and it seems we're in the minority on that for this theme. Reminds me of a fun beat-em-up video game from the 90's!
Sorry Rhado, Shadowrun is awful. Any game you can flip a card early on that pretty much says "you lose" is a bad bad game. We tried it over and over. Even when that doesn't happen, it's just sit there and figure out the obvious answer.
In his review he briefly covers this problem. It does take a few games of grinding and losing to get some upgrades to start winning. And he says some people will go ahead and put 1 upgrade onto their card just so they can actually stand a chance to win. Having said that, yes the initial grind was no fun at all and there are times where you just flip a few cards (which lead to a few more cards) and just put the game away, but now that I have a few upgrades I enjoy the game a LOT more. I understand anyone who doesn't make it past the grind, though.
don't forget, the developers of the game win 90% of their sessions, with no upgrades or anything. there are no "you lose" cards... just cards that really force you to make unconventional strategic and tactical choices :)
I think there are some other reasons why people don't like Shadowrun Crossfire that weren't mentioned here: A lot of people complained that there wasn't enough mission variety in the original game and that it was a very slow (too slow) grind to get upgrades. Some people don't want to play a game so many times in order to upgrade their character. A game like Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, which was a contemporary of Shadowrun Crossfire, I feel, allows its players to upgrade their characters and/or their items (deck) far more frequently.
Personally didn't like it because it had Game Over cards: either from the crossfire deck or from the enemy deck. Some of them nullify your upgrades. It's really fun grinding to upgrade your starting hand to 7 and drawing: discard down to 2 cards. Yeah, really fun!
We ended up just cheating with XP, this is not an MMO or a F2P game. No one was interested in grinding.
I didn’t like the fact that the decks were constant. Unlike pathfinder, where I would change the cards in my character’s deck, with Shadowrun: Crossfire, you always start with the same basic deck-or maybe that was an upgrade?-I never got far enough to find out.
DarthEd77 The complaint about the grind is fair. Also, the game gets much more consistent and varied with High Caliber Ops.
As Richard has pointed out: The number of missions in Shadowrun: Crossfire is higher than the 1 in, say, Pandemic. Do people complain that Pandemic has only one mission?
There is A DEFINITE elitist, (takes the hobby way too seriously), culture on the BGG boards and therefore the ratings will skew low. (Check the forums for ample examples of humourless, didactic, overly analytical, comments and discussions). I've played a number of great games that rate low because the comments indicate the game's 'beneath' them- sorta what you described in talking about Bomb Squad: Too many there take playing games as serious work. I've had too many experiences with militant, condescending, "serious" gamers. If you want proof, just look at the comments here already!! LMAO.
A big thumbs-up for showing the game in question while you talk about it! Saves me from rummaging in my memory department or opening up a second browser window to refresh my own thoughts and recollections about the game. Way to go for your next top 10 list videos :)
I dismiss Shadowrun Crossfire because the encounters are wildly imbalanced. Plus character progression is so slow (and unrewarding) and the way they handle character elimination is one of the most convoluted messes I've ever seen. I hope the new version normalizes the difficulty curve because I do like coops and I do like deck builders. I know as I'm writing this you'll dismiss it out of hand, but I know many who should like this and found the experience punishing and unfun.
Every one of these points are fair and on point. Everything you just said is my biggest gripes about SC. I got the game on Richard's recommendation (I think it was the second game I bought when I started buying games, Pathfinder ACG being the first) and I still love the game. Sure, I put the box up 15 minutes after the long setup sometimes because I'm so frustrated with the draw and the first few games were very punishing, but after a couple of upgrades, man this game is rewarding after puzzling it out and beating it. Also, having a second brain and set of eyes is almost like playing a different game than playing solo.
G Skub long setup??
i don't dismiss it out of hand, i just heartily disagree :)
@divided123 I actually meant a long setup when you rage throw it back in the box after playing for 10 minutes. lol I know there are plenty of much longer setups out there.
For me one thing that messed up my enjoyment of Spirits of the Rice Paddy was how the rules limited the overall water supply, so I ended up with a game where my opponent basically managed to hog all the water for most of the game, choosing deliberately not to empty it out at times even though it hurt him because it hurt me more, and there wasn't much water left in the overall supply to actually fulfill the rain cards. Because of it I decided to ignore the water limitations for my next game, because that experience just wasn't fun at all... and then it just didn't get back to the table.
I however agree with you on Subdivision. Got it absolutely dirt cheap after watching the runthrough, and I really enjoy it. Should try to get it back to the table soon, it's really been too long.
Kashgar is not a deckbuilder because you don't have decks (which are random by definition), but rather a queue builder. ;-) There are real reasons why this isn't higher. For one, you can never play more than one card per turn, so you never get the rush of playing multiple card combos. Two, your queues can get incredibly long and it can take forever to cycle through to your cool cards. Three, cards that actually do thin out your deck are overpowered because if your opponent gets one early and you don't, it becomes very hard for you to win. Four, if you get a winning combo going, you'll win the game, but the gameplay until then will be incredibly dull. Play card A, play card B, A, B, A, B, A, win. Yey... These drawbacks are only apparent when you play the game multiple times, which is why many reviewers give this great reviews. They likely don't play this enough to find its flaws.
Isn’t it just a deck you can see? Sure it’s spread out but it’s function is exactly the same, putting cards in the bottom and “drawing” from the top. As for thinning you should also keep one deck small and powerful.
@@jareduxr The point of a deck is that it's randomized and you don't know what you're drawing, so the function is not the same. Also, you have no hand. You just trigger one of the cards that's on top. A faceup pile of cards that is never shuffled is a queue. It doesn't change anything regarding whether you like the game or not, but calling it a deckbuilder might give people the wrong impressions.
Marco Schaub I don’t think a deck of cards as a rule must be face down or shuffled. Cambridge dictionary defines a deck as “a set of cards used for playing card games.” So your personal definition is a bit more specific and exclusive. Other deckbuilder games like Aeon’s End have little or no shuffling. Shuffling often comes with deck builders but it’s not required.
They are basically three separate sets of cards, you may only draw a card from the top and add to the bottom, you normally may not take the top card and put it in a different set, you may not normally change the order of the cards. Players often try to get different sets of cards to function for a specific purpose (resource generation, resource exchange, contracts, etc). Sounds like a set or deck to me, despite the different presentation.
randomized cards if a feature of a deck, but not a requirement. another good example is ryan lauket's city of iron, where you have control over the order of cards in the deck :)
I completely agree with you about Shadowrun: Crossfire. Fantastically underrated games. It does have problems and issues, and is a much much better game with High Caliber Ops.
My favorite aspect of the game (other than the Shadowrun theme) is that it absolutely forces you to make decisions that do not seem logical at first glance. It takes a while to get new people into it, but get a game or two under their belts and it gets its claws in them.
Many people think that several of the crossfire cards are instant lose cards. Many of them seem like that at first, but if you make some unconventional moves you can overcome them.
We just had a game this weekend where we were squeaking through the 2nd scene of Pandemic. Entered the 3rd scene with 9HP between 4 runners (OUCH!), and a crossfire level of 5 (bad black market flips -- 3 9¥ cards clogging up the market for a while). Talked the Drone Rigger in the 4th seat into buying Black Market Contacts during their scene buy (they had just reached 9¥ with a rocket launcher sitting in the market), promising that 2 of us could kill something before their turn. Managed to barely kill them, letting the Drone Rigger buy the rocket launcher in the middle of their turn, which was then used to prevent 11! points of damage by moving obstacles.
We thought for sure we were toast going into the 3rd scene and were about to give it up, but with an uncommon play -- we don't use Black Market Contacts at the table very much, the Drone Rigger was able to turn it around for us. They were looking at 6 obstacles at the end of their turn, but we had more turns available to whittle them down before the Drone Rigger got to go again.
I completely agree with your view of Shadowrun: Crossfire. Fantastic game. By far my most played game of the past couple of years. I've played it an order of magnitude more times than any other game.
Nice review as always, Rahdo. Thanks for sharing your opinion on games, which are not so popular. Personally, I don't get board games based on BGG rating, I get them based on what I think I would like to play and what I think would feel good when played. This is why I like your videos - they bring out the feeling of a game being played and show the smoothness and the playing process of a few turns.
BTW is that Forbidden sky?
correct! runthrough should be coming soon :)
I think you're right about the limited distribution of Habitats being a contributing factor for it not ranking higher. After hearing good things about it I've been searching the past few weeks for an affordable place to buy it. I finally found a someone online selling a dented/dinged copy for $38 shipped, and had it sitting in my shopping cart the past day or two trying to decide if it was worth the price. Thanks to you Rahdo, once you said that this game is giving Glen Moore a run for its money and is easily in your top 10 tile laying games, I immediately paused the video, switched tabs, and pulled the trigger to buy Habitats. Thanks Rahdo!
Kashgar will definitely climb with the English release! I think... I hope. Maybe the theme will still keep some away? Live this game! Maybe a re-theming would push it up a lot of people'a lists? I pasted up the German version and still may get the English release 😁
When you compare your ranking with everyone elses you should take into account that you automatically don't like 50% of the games because there is too much conflict in them and almost exclusively play games that work with 2 players.
This, I enjoy Radho's content and I have nothing but respect for him as a game developer, but I always take his reviews of competitive games with a grain of salt because of his bias.
I'm not saying it's BAD... some people don't like some types of games, I'm not going to fault him for it - but a reviewer needs to be impartial when looking at a game and not falling victim to their own personal feelings.
Ryan McGechaen I disagree there. I think it’s important to know peoples biases to make an informed decision. Since there is no such thing as being impartial since all opinions are subjective I think it’s great he’s open about his biases. Many reviewers are not as open (or don’t have the personal insight required) to inform the viewer of their bias, thereby requiring the viewer to first “get to know them”.
The most important thing to know when researching board games is how your tastes align with the reviewer. Because that will let you gauge how much stock you should put in their opinion.
Maybe because Rahdo's video are not review
Maybe true, but that's not related to the content of this video. This is about games that he likes not ones that he hates, so I'm not sure how you made this comment unless you didn't watch.
Yep the whole vid is about games he likes that others don’t...
I was hoping that this list was the opposite. Games that are high on bgg, but you aren’t sure why they are so high.
a few months ago, i did do a top10 overrated games video, but it's only available on my patreon page for folks who back at the $2/month level (you can just back for one month, watch everything, and then cancel though) :)
patreon.com/rahdo is the site if you're interested
Nice list and great video. Where can we find the BGG feature you talk about? can't seem to find it.
well here's a link to my stats page: boardgamegeek.com/user/rahdo/stats if you replace 'rahdo' with whatever your bgg user name is in that URL, you'll get to yours! :)
@@rahdo thank you very much. I was looking in the collection page. :)
One thing I noticed about a lot of the games on this list is the swing and miss when it comes to art and aesthetics. There are so many gorgeous games coming out these days and I think that art is something a game ignores at its peril. Some of them are shocking in how much of a missed opportunity they are, Spirits of the rice paddies for example could have been so gorgeous and it just dropped the ball.
But the real question still stands: What are games you don't like but BGG? And what are your reasons for that?
This top10 is a bit one-sided. I see why, but it would be really interesting to get another step out and talk about the reasons you don't like the games everyone else seems to adore so much. Especially with your knowledge about GameMechanics and Playstiles.
Rahdo would never do that. His reviews are like eulogies: speak a good word or remain silent :)
a few months ago, i did do a top10 overrated games video, but it's only available on my patreon page for folks who back at the $2/month level (you can just back for one month, watch everything, and then cancel though) :)
patreon.com/rahdo is the site if you're interested
@@rahdo thanks for the info, sorry for being presumptuous :) I will check the video
oh you were right to presume. it's not a video i'd normally do, but since only a small audience will see it, i went ahead :)
NIce video, but Rahdo - Really? You think we're just going to ignore Forbidden Sky sprawled out in front of you there? When's that one going up?
it's filmed, just waiting for paulo to goof check it :)
I would have liked for you to have said what BGG actually rates them.
I hate in the year of the dragon because it is a lesson in sado-masochism. I suspect I would dislike peloponnes for the same reason based on your description.
very likely :)
Me and my husband, we LOVE Shadowrun Crossfire. It’s one of our favorites. We really don’t understand people saying it is unbeatable. As a matter of fact, we have been winning on a strike for 15+ games. But then, to be fair, we usually win when playing coops (we’ve never lost a game of Space Hulk: Death Angel). Shadowrun Crossfire is amazing! And watching your runthrough following the designer’s game was mind-opening for us. It is, like Legends of Andor, a fully cooperative game that must be played as such. We are a team, not individual characters. To me, the game is close to perfection.
Bianca Pinheiro If you’ve never lost a game of SH:DA, there is no chance that you’ve played correctly ;)
Out of 100 plays, I’m at a 72% win rate (which I think is crazy high after tons of practice/learning).
Peloponnese has been on my want list since it came out and I cant find it. I didn't even know there was a card game. Now I have 2 games to hunt for!
Jus wan to point out You just keep mixing up subdivision with suburbia in your video. I get it that it can be kind of tongue twister.
I don't know about BGG, but a thing that happens to me sometimes is that I watch you having lots of fun with a game and when I get it its not so fun for me :/.
I picked up Apocalypse Chaos for £10 a few years ago so was glad it wasn't too popular that day. It is very thinky, almost like an abstract in how many moves ahead you have to think. The rulebook was a bit unclear in parts as well, so people prob knock a mark off for that as well
fair point, i forgot about the rulebook :)
about kashgar. i dont play competitive card games at all. they turn me off thematically and component wise. i want board in my games. in general, a central board help ppl focus somewhere and watch how everyone is doing easily
There's certainly a flaw in the BGG rating/ranking system, in that (despite clear markers & explanations) people don't use it consistently to mean the same thing; explicitly, each person's rating is *meant to be* a measure of their own feelings about how much/often they personally feel like playing the game-yet some people choose to ignore that guidance and use their ratings for other things (e.g.: their opinion of the quality of the game, or as a way to game/politicize the rankings of high-visibility games and/or features). Rahdo, it sounds like you, while being aware of the stated intention of the ratings, are still thinking of the aggregated ratings/ranking as being *entirely* a measure of "how good a game is"-that you're interpreting a lower BGG rating/ranking as meaning the BGG community thinks the game isn't a good game.
Except that isn't what the ratings mean [when people use them correctly]. I could see/play a game which, while being an amazingly well-designed game with beautiful art, quality components, and a clear rulebook, is a style [or difficulty] of game I don't personally enjoy and I would have to give it a low rating-because I don't want to play it. If there were a separate field to give the game a rating based on my opinion of its quality (and really, at that point I'd want separate ratings for things like mechanics, art, rules, components, complexity, et cetera) I might give the game a very high score-but I still wouldn't want to play it. A significant number of your "Final Thoughts" videos where you say a game isn't for you still say similar things: That you can see that it's a great, well-designed/beautiful/etc game, but that it doesn't fit your play style. As a critic (which I know you don't want to be) you might give it a high score, but on the BGG scale you'd give it a low score.
In summary: These games aren't underrated, there's nothing "unfair" about their ratings/rankings being low-but the average community member of BGG happens to disagree with you about what sorts of games they find fun and want to play more. I don't have a link to hand right now, but this data can actually be *helpful* if mined properly-I recall seeing, once upon a time, a way to easily see games which I hadn't played/rated but which were highly rated by other people whose ratings were similar to mine; that is, when ratings are used correctly the BGG community self-identifies its own sub-communities, within which your opinions are shared and you can more easily find more games you'll love than if you look at the site as a whole.
Teel McClanahan This post is do self-contradictory! Use the rates ha correctly and it shows how much people like the game. You say that, then contradict that!
Herbaceous, Harbour and the latest group of roll-n-writes are on the top of my list. I'll dismiss the dice games (Istanbul, Castles of Burgundy, Steamrollers, No Siesta) as they are relatively new and may someday find an audience, but come on - Herbaceous and Harbour are fantastic tight and stressful gateway games. I'm sure the gateway is a big part the issue, but both offer more real gamer strategy than the Ticket to Rides of the gaming world.
I really will never understand why gamers in every part of the world always forget to notice Bruno Cathala's co-designers! Even in France! I know Bruno Cathala is often the most famous of the two, but it would be so nice to have both names given for every game that involves co-designers.
I do agree on the Habitats game, and Kashgar, but for this one, I think that's due to the TLDR phenomenon that hinders people from playing games with large trunks of text on the cards. Especially if you consider people often only play once or twice a game before they go to the next. Not worth investing so much time.
that is a fair point, all i can say is it's human nature to gravitate to the 'celeb' in a collaboration. hard not to, but you're right, i should do better!
Hey Rahdo, I love Bohnanza the Duel, so glad to share your opinion. By the way, you can play basic Bohnanza with it to.
oh really? that i did not know, thanks for the heads up! :)
Apocalypse Chaos is $10.00 right now on MM!
Totally agree with you on Kashgar. It surprised me also that Kosmos waited so long for an
english version!
actually, kosmos didn't give us the english version. grail games got the rights from the to publish it! :)
rahdo Syl and I had the german version from the beginning and never looked really for the english version but now you mentioned Grail Games I do remember it wasn’t Kosmos who published the english version.
What’s the learning curve for Kashgar? Hard to teach? Is the rule book good? A lot of in game tracking? Etc.
Got it from Grail Games, so amazing, everything I've introduced it to has absolutely fell in love with it. Kind of want more, but tons of stuff in the box as it stands:)
it's a pretty straightforward, streamlined euro :)
I think that you're spot on about Subdivision, Rahdo, especially since the game was first billed as depicting the construction of a single hex tile of Suburbia (presumably the suburbs common tile), creating the natural expectation (for me at least) that there would be more diverse types of lower-level buildings to construct and decisions to make (e.g. should I put the community pool next to the police station?). After consulting many reviews, I avoided it for some time, until I got a chance to snatch it on mega-sale to see if I'd enjoy it in its own right, with those initial expectations gone. And yes, I did ... as more of a successor to Feudality than Suburbia. It seems to be a pattern with Bezier Games; The Palace of Mad King Ludwig seems to be more of a descendant of Carcassonne: The City than its similarly named predecessor.
Peleponnes is indeed unfairly treated. Every single time I bring it to a game con, it is played every time, all the time. That's proof enough for me.
SR XF seems to get a new edition I read somewhere, would need to check that out.
Just want to say SOS Titanic was sold out everywhere when it first came out almost immediately, so I think it’s definitely the print run issue more than anything else.
Yeah, this is my assumption as well. I've had it on my "want in trade" list forever b/c it's so difficult to find (at least at a reasonable price). Hopefully this will give it a little boost so someone would consider another print run.
I should have watched this video earlier... I just asked you yesterday about Shadowrun Crossfire, and here it is hahaha. And yes, the BGG rating system is kinda strange, I don't even understand my own ratings sometimes... I rated Shadowrun 7.4, and I actually DO like it a lot... I think I need to review my ratings every now and then to reflect my updated views on gaming as a whole.
I don't think there is a stigma against co-op games. They just are a lot harder to balance and create.
Not to mention the people that specifically play co-ops are okay with a 40% win rate, the average gamer likes to win around 60-70% of the time.
Will get shot down by the BGG fanboys and girls but the term Geek is probably the biggest roadblock to a broader participation in Boardgaming.
David Thurling Maybe but the people that will enjoy sitting around a table puzzling out efficiency probably don’t mind the label, especially as being a geek has become part of pop culture (super hero movies, Harry Potter, Star Wars, etc)
JW G. My point is that many dont. Why does boardgaming have to be geeky? Maybe its a throwback to the days when students played DnD. It’s certainly not a reflection of the modern hobby.
I agree there is still stigma with board games. Especially if there is any miniatures involved. As to your point yes, it may deter a lot of people but I don't care if anyone calls me a geek. I think whatever your hobby is or whatever you're into, you're a geek for that. Even if it's running marathons. You're a marathon geek.
But good lord, you talk about solo gaming and people get this look of pity in their eyes like "oh honey, you don't have anyone to play with?" Sometimes I reply "Do you read books with your friends or by yourself?"
interesting... i would say the biggest roadblock is the rulebook barrier myself :)
People are a bit funny with board games... I told someone at work the other day that I play board games and they looked at me like I had leprosy 🤔
I also like some of these games. Bomb Squad is fun to play sometimes, but the theme doesn't fit at all (which I feel is where it suffers in reception).
Also, I personally feel that one should NOT enter a rating unless they have played it at least once.
As much as I love Bohnanza, Duel just didn’t do it for me. The bonus cards are just so incredibly random...I’ve lost more than one game after an opponent lucked out and picked up bonus card after bonus card that they could immediately fulfill.
S.O.S. Titanic is definitely one I would have on my list too. I actually bought this one because of your recommendation a few years back and am very happy that the game was still available at the time. Shame that not everyone who wants it can get it easily now. I know of at least one person who has been looking for it at a reasonable price, but their hunt continues. heh ;-)
I just got Apocalypse Chaos the other week but haven't played it yet. Will need to get it to the table later this week :)
Sorry couldn't help but chuckle at the everyone hates on subdivision because it's not like it's more popular counterpart subdivision. And the constant mixing up of the names for that segment. haha Great piece there are many games i feel don't get a lot of love because of bgg rankings keeping them down so it was good to see a video like this.
yup, i was embarrassed! :)
Just for fun, I ran the stats on my ratings... mostly my rating is higher than BGG's, but #7 and #1 on this list are exceptions. Ignoring expansions and children's games, I get:
10. Project: ELITE (I love co-ops, and time pressure is a great way to make sure everyone needs to be involved... give breaks in between the timed phases, though, and suddenly you can discuss strategy with the other players again. So excited that this is getting a reprint!)
9. Favor of the Pharaoh (Basically I love dice games, and this is kind of Yahtzee with special powers and a dramatic ending.)
8. Aeon's End (The biggest thing I hate about deck builders is the constant shuffling of small decks. Flip over your deck instead? Yeah, that's a huge plus for me. Add in a fantasy theme, co-op play, and lots of cards that combo well with each other... this is right in my sweet spot.)
7. Star Wars: Imperial Assault (Never been a fan of the dungeon-in-a-box games and this one seemed to have absolutely nothing going for it other than the Star Wars theme.)
6. Ave Roma (Apparently Jen described it as "Just the right level of brain burn". I agree.)
5. Pandemic: The Cure (A dice game that captures the feel of Pandemic while playing quicker? Sign me up!)
4. Dead Panic (The theme works great for the mechanics of the Castle Panic series... endless hordes of zombies, coming right up.)
3. Wiz-War 8th Edition (My rating may have gotten a bump for nostalgia reasons.)
2. The Big Bang Theory: The Party Game (Apples to Apples is too boring and CAH is too dirty... this is just right.)
1. Lost: The Game (The only game I've ever rated a 1.)
Well, all these games look interesting, but just that, interesting. And, with so many excellent games the last decade or so, simply being interesting just won't make the cut for most of us.
This is one of the cases that I really think that the 2.9K people that have rated Shadowrun, for example, have actually created an honest average. It's not bad, not for me anyway, but not that good for the majority.
Anyway, thank you for a nice video as always!
Give Peloponnes a try.
Sure, in the extremely unlikely chance that someone will ask me to.
Interesting topic. I did this my self and had 3 games and one was an expansion.
Star Trek panic (Mine 9 BGG 6.03) Yes isn't for everyone I know. I just loved the theme and the challenge right off the bat.
Race for the Galaxy (Me 5 BGG 7.67) The iconography was really hard to get into. Roll for the galaxy was much easier to grasp.
Arkham horror the Card game (Me 5 BGG 7.919) Well I was eager to get but found it lackluster. The whole idea of upgrading was intriguing but I found it cumbersome. matter of opinion of course.
CV Gossip (me 8 BGG 5.8) it's and expansion to a decent dice chucker. It adds to an already good game that adds more things to add and a few twists along the way. the gossip aspect doesn't work as well but the added Fate cards added something cool if you rolled bad luck.
I'll have to look at habitats. Looks interesting.
Suburbia is still my favorite of the 'Sub' games.
If I use that bgg feature. The top 10 would be:
1) Dead Last, 2) Mage Knight, 3) Loopin Louie, 4) Descent 2E, 5) Sentinels of the Multiverse, 6) Paperback, 7) Monopoly Gamer, 8) Jamaica, 9) Eminent Domain, 10) Through the Ages.
They're all games I've rated 1-4. XD
Can you still use this tool in BGG? Where can I find it?
the link is www.boardgamegeek.com/collection/user/rahdo?rated=1&ff=1&sort=delta&sortdir=desc&columns=title%7Cbggrating%7Crating&hiddencolumns=delta but you need to change 'rahdo' with your own bgg name :)
I’m not sure if it the BGG rankings so much as how people use the BGG rankings. For games that I can appreciate, but don’t really like, I would rate them as a 6 or maybe as high as a 7 (kinda like it sorta). If I rate a game as low as a 4 or a 2 then I REALLY don’t like it.
Good opinion, I agree with you. And way too many people use dumb hate votes like a "1". This is the biggest problem of the BGG ranking system. Other than that it's fine. It's just the users that got to man up and use it more wisely.
Pleeeease do another one of these videos!!!! Peloponnes was under my radar! 😊
it might be something i circle back around to someday :)
I have not played apocalypse chaos but its one that I would like to get. I get the impression from reviews that it only plays well with 2 players so the other reviewers were not as keen
interesting. i of course only played as a 2p, and it's SUPER crunchy... maybe it gets too crunchy at higher player counts? I could see that
I wish the discrepancy function on BGG used average rating instead of the Geek Rating which is heavily weighted against games that haven't been rated as much. Using the geek rating can make the discrepancy look very misleading. A much maligned game could score higher than a game that has reviewed very well but is just a hidden gem.
For example, Shadow Run Crossfire has a 7.24 average rating which is a pretty decent score vs a 6.7 geek rating which is more than half a point lower and puts it behind a number of other games in geek rating that have average ratings that are much lower (like Forbidden Island with an average rating of 6.83 but with considerably more votes and a geek rating of 6.74) .
I do think the Geek rating is a reasonable compromise for creating a single number used to rank the games... but when a person is looking into how good a game is, the ranking using that single number isn't as useful as looking at BOTH the average rating and the number of ratings.
This list basically consists entirely of games that aren't well known or that people just aren't interested in trying.
Shadowrun: Crossfire has the most ratings, with almost 3,000... but because of that, it's also the only game on the list that is ranked in the top 1,000 on BGG. SOS Titanic has the second most ratings on this list, with about 1,250. The only other game above 1,000 ratings here is Subdivision, and that just barely. Even Bohnanza: The Duel only has 585 ratings, and that despite the fact that the parent game has over 32,000.
Oh, and yes... the discrepancy function should absolutely use average rating. Given that you've rated it, the best comparison with other people's ratings is the average opinion of other people that have actually rated it. The "dummy" ratings thrown in for the Geek rating simply make no sense in this context.
Also, I hadn't realized that #2 was a combo... Peloponnes Card Game is indeed below 1,000 ratings, but the original Peloponnes has just under 2,500 ratings and thus is also in the top 1,000 by ranking.
And I've always used the top 1,000 ranked games as a good rule-of-thumb for very solid, playable games... exact personal rankings are simply a matter of taste, but getting in the top 1,000 on BGG is an accomplishment in itself.
I actually think your critique of the BGG rating system is WAY more interesting than your specific list of games.
It's not a coincidence that most of the games on your list are co-op. Most people want a game where you play competitive and the BGG system explicitly encourages people not to vote on game-quality, but on how likely they are to play the game.
I don't really fance co-op or solitaire games either, but I see the same problem with grand wargames. Many people vote some of the games, regardless of of brilliant they are made or how good they are for players who want to put the time and effort into it very low - and they do that solely because they don't want to put time and effort into them.
That's especially bad for grand wargames which non-grognards know exists, since they still vote on them.
Games like "Empires in Arms" have gotten many more low votes than other less quality wargames, since people who have just tried a few turn will vote it down solely for the time it takes to play the (otherwise great) game.
BGG should have a rating factor for game design quality. Where your personal likely hood to play the game was not a factor, but where objective assessment of game mechanisms and game design within its genre was the metric.
This might seem odd coming from me since I can be critical of games that a LOT of others really like, but I will say that board game opinions from players are some of the most widely spread out over the spectrum of love or hate.
SOS Titanic. A shame this is out of print. There are many people who have Titanic movie parties, listen to the soundtrack, and this game would fit in.
Funnily enough, my 3 biggest discrepancies are with games that I disliked compared to games that are popular on BGG ( Descent 2.0, The Pillars of the Earth and Dixit )
Wow, that was fun! We're just getting into Co-ops, (Pandemic, Forbidden Desert) so Shadow Run Crossfire is on the want list. I think Zooloretto is underrated, as is the dice game...
Actually, except for Bonanza Duel (which I like), I have never played any of those games. And as I don't really like SF games (except some very special ones like Roll or Race), I won't play many of them (though Subdivision looks great). Maybe one really shouldn't look at where one's favorite games are on BGG
You really didn't sell me on this Titanic thing ... I guess it requires that you like playing Klondike.
yes, it certainly does!
I have only played Kashgar with 4 players and it was a draaaag.
Theme doesn't bother me, as most of my favourite games are euros.
This may be one like a Grand Austria Hotel, where it's length with more players make it an issue. I really disliked Kashgar because I sat around doing nothing for large chunks of the game. I also felt that the luck elements of the card draw as to what was available to purchase really made it a not fun experience.
Perhaps far better with 2 players.
I have around 200 rated games on BGG and I just went to see what are my underrated games. I have none. 0! :(
On the other hand, I have 9 overrated games.
Great list, I know most games you mentioned and own half and fully agree these games need more love.
SR: Crossfire is sooooo good!!
Thanks for the list. I'll see if I can try some of these out.
What is that game on your table?
Forbidden Sky
yup, runthrough probably coming next week once paulo rips it apart for goofs :)
I'm so glad you have Paulo and don't have to sit and read all the negative comments about the goofs. The raw "sit and play" is why we love your videos, as you're fully aware. 🙂
I completely agree with Peleponnes - I tout its praises frequently on r/boardgames
Interesting video. Thanks ;)
SOS Titanic... A Game with 2 Game designers Bruno Cathala and Ludovic Maublanc ^^
Deck/Engine Building might be my favorite mechanic :)
BGG really likes coop deckbuilding Arkham Horror: The Card Game is rank 17. Arkham Horror has engagning and rewarding deckbuiling options between every game. Shadowrun lacks in the character progression and is also slow.
can't disagree with that. it's probably more the super high challenge level, plus i forgot to mention a lot of people hate the legacy-style stickers :)
The stickers are the main reason I passed on SC
The real question is.....what is that amazing looking game set out in front of Rahdo?
that's forbidden sky :)
Real looking forward to the SRC reprint!
Habitats is the bomb! One of my fave tile laying games! I am usually on board with most of the publisher's designs.
Who cares what BGG says. Personal opinion is all that should matter. Interesting list nonetheless.
With a limited budget it's hard not to take a peek and go for what's popular. If you skew towards Richard's tastes (more euro, less violence) this is a good list.
"greater geek community" ... oh, that sounds like a powerful lobbying group if i ever heard one (-:
Subdivision radically different? 7 Wonders Duel is radically different from it’s parent.
I didn't see your top 10 overrated games on your channel. Could you give me the link please? ^^
it's a "rahdo ramble" video, which is only available on my patreon page for folks who back at the $2/month level (you can just back for one month, watch everything, and then cancel though) :)
patreon.com/rahdo is the site if you're interested
I assume that Palaces of Carrara is on that list for you as well. I think I rate the game slightly higher than you do but that is the game in my collection that I rank higher than BGG. I am willing to bet the low number of English language copies has something to do with the low ranking.
No, it was just bad marketing, raising false expectations. They marketed it as being a theme bomb with all the awesome looks etc, but in the end it's nothing else than a huge math puzzle. Title should be "The Rulers of Calculation: the Math Warriors strike back". Hate this game with a passion. And I am a Eurogamer and love my dry stuff. I am sorry.
I have not heard about 8 out of 10 of these games and I am a avid gamer.
be more avid! :)
Rahdo looks like a mad scientist, or a Lord of the rings wizard. Why not dress up as either and get more thematic? :-)
My least favorite game types: #1 Real-Time and #2 Deck-Building.
that would make for an interesting combo!
Subdivision for sure!
Really cool top 10 theme
I haven't played any of these and although not playing them I can't rate them....but if I turned off the sound and just look at the games on the screen, most of those 10 just don't look good, or theme isn't exciting, so I would just grab something else. So good games can be hurt by look & theme. I am sure there are more reasons on them but since I haven't played I can't comment, but guessing things you mentioned on some of them are good reasons they wouldn't rate higher. Love the videos though :-)
This was my thought too. Watching this video with a sleeping baby, so no sound. The art and theme seems lacking on a lot of these.
Hulk gamer.
I felt the same way. Just looking at all these games, I was like just blah. No thanks.
Obviously I can't speak for him, but Richard has to play a lot of pre-production games and I think that has made him look past the concept artwork and components and see the gameplay mechanics. Which is funny because he gets so into the story and things functioning logically. Myself I have been getting into print and play lately (lack of funds for the hobby) and it's very very hard for me to get into a mediocre game if the artwork isn't there. It really makes a huge difference to me.
I will say Jaipur is one of the most amazing games I have ever played (and my wife feels the same) and we have SUCH A HARD TIME getting this to the table for anyone else because they HATE the artwork. I think it fits after playing it but for people playing the first time they actually act like I have horrible judgement in what a good game is when I ask to play Jaipur.
Doesn't look like too much has changed with the new edition of Crossfire: ua-cam.com/video/1TZaj3QOb_Q/v-deo.html
Minor class stat bumps and options for lower player counts to swap a higher card at the beginning but exhaustion tokens make healing criticals harder.
I like this game but I don't find the cardplay as interesting as a game like Aeon's End. The character building is a lot of fun however.
SOS Titanic was at 4th place in my top 10 solo games list in 2017. It is an elegant game design through and through in every aspect. Highly recommended. I can relate to Rhado.
Well but my highest disparity with BGG could give rhado a stroke. Its Gloomhaven.
Thanks Rahdo, just purchased Apocalypse Chaos on eBay.
Fun video, Rahdo. Good idea :-).
it's... it's Jen !!!"
there's more: jen.rahdo.com :)
Hmm...maybe it is since you only play 2P games so these games get under the radar.In addition,n while I liken cooperative games competitve gaming is what floats the boat for the majority I guess.
By an amazing coincidence my wife and I were just playing Crossfire last night. It's one of our favorites too. In fact, I was even saying that I know you have regrets about introducing the final thoughts portion of your runthroughs, but I am so glad you had it for Crossfire. I was pretty sure I would like it, but hearing you rave about how amazingly collaborative it is ,which doesn't always come through with one dude and a camera, is what tipped us over into giving it a try, and I'm so grateful.
I kind of have mixed feelings about the prime runner edition too. I used to play it with a group of co-workers, and we probably were averaging a 70%-80% win rate. If I were still living around them, I'd probably be more inclined to scoff, but we've been playing a lot with just the two of us, and it really is a big step up in difficulty. I'd kind of love something to smooth out the difficulty curve a bit more at lower player counts.
Silk Road dry subject matter? Kashgar is great.
Altiplano,Troyes,Ethnos And Vinhos for me... All much to low.
Love the idea for the list. Considering you can often find Apocalypse Chaos for less than $20, it's a steal. I think some of the things against it is the terrible name. The art isn't great. Just a bit of effort and they could have really bumped stuff up. Like naming the heroes. Your videos and the designers videos convinced me to try Shadowrun: Crossfire. It's my most played game by a lot. I don't buy the argument about grinding. The solution is simple Start with 5 karma, or 10. Who cares. For the people who said it's too hard, it takes experience and you really have to get the correct card from the market instead of the best you can afford like the Legendary games. Also for the difficulty, I can't say this enough: Try the Extraction scenario. Or get Dragonfire, which is considerably easier.
Where is this 'minority pushback against cooperative games' is coming from? More than fifth in BGG Top 100 are cooperative games, that's huge compared to some years back :)
you can find it in these very comments from other posts who express their dislike for all things co-op. but i agree that it is a minority, and the tide is turning :)
Hanabi meet Fuse! Baby? Bomb Squad!
I know this game was released last year, but I think Massive Darkness is an underrated game. I feel Sword and Sorcery is a little bit overrated, due to the fact that I wasn't able to get through the rules. Lol
I really, really wanted to love Massive Darkness and I need to try it again, but man alive, I felt like it was the fiddliest fiddle for what it was. Conversely, I loved Sword and Sorcery and thought it flowed pretty well, but I read the rulebook a few times before I cracked it open. I'm glad I still have MD because the minis are so cool, but I pray CMON can try a S2 with a rules redo.
@@Gutock Lol I felt that way about the D&D Adventure Games after playing Massive Darkness. But then I learned to appreciate the Adventure Games again. Sword and Sorcery I've always felt was a good replacement for campaign based Crawlers, I just found the rules/game management to be too much for solo play.
I think Massive Darkness has a hard time finding a home. Zombicide did well because a lot of casual and non-gamers will appreciate the theme. When you get dungeons, mages, and barbarians onto a table, it turns off a lot of people and what's left are the more hardcore gamers who want a game like Sword and Sorcery or even Gloomhaven instead of the casual rules of MD.
@@staticklingon2182 Which is ironic, as I love the casual rules and how it doesn't punish the player like the D&D Adventure Games or the Road to Legend app for Descent.
Oh I agree 100%. I love the casual-ness of it, and it seems we're in the minority on that for this theme. Reminds me of a fun beat-em-up video game from the 90's!
Sorry Rhado, Shadowrun is awful. Any game you can flip a card early on that pretty much says "you lose" is a bad bad game. We tried it over and over. Even when that doesn't happen, it's just sit there and figure out the obvious answer.
In his review he briefly covers this problem. It does take a few games of grinding and losing to get some upgrades to start winning. And he says some people will go ahead and put 1 upgrade onto their card just so they can actually stand a chance to win. Having said that, yes the initial grind was no fun at all and there are times where you just flip a few cards (which lead to a few more cards) and just put the game away, but now that I have a few upgrades I enjoy the game a LOT more. I understand anyone who doesn't make it past the grind, though.
don't forget, the developers of the game win 90% of their sessions, with no upgrades or anything. there are no "you lose" cards... just cards that really force you to make unconventional strategic and tactical choices :)