There are many people for whom the nice bits and pieces enhance their enjoyment of the game. I’m certainly one of them. I know others who take it a step further and will buy games just because they’re pretty / cute / whatever. It’s not a design issue, it’s appealing to a larger market.
If you’re “appealing to a larger market” by making the game so expensive that only a few can afford it, are you really getting a larger market? Or are you just deciding you want to cater to rich folk?
I’m with @drolex here. I think it may be time for board/card/whatever game designers to return to basics: making games that people play, not the board game equivalent of a coffee table book.
‘So expensive that only a few can afford it’ is pretty hyperbole. Boardgaming is one of the cheapest hobbies you can have, especially on a cost per time basis. I would much rather pay an extra few bucks for nicer pieces for a game that I’m going to enjoy for years and years.
I happen to run a boardgame club, and I can attest that pretty much everybody I’ve talked to about this topic feels the same way. Given the choice between a classic game with cardboard chits or a newer game with the same mechanics and prettier pieces, we’re playing the new one every time.
I’m not sure what your point is? According to bgg, it released in 1987 at a RRP of $17. I’m hoping the message is that my collection will pay for my early retirement.
The point is these are games MADE FOR RICH PEOPLE. You know, like I said at the beginning of your blank incomprehension:
If you’re “appealing to a larger market” by making the game so expensive that only a few can afford it, are you really getting a larger market? Or are you just deciding you want to cater to rich folk?
$150 for an all cardboard game. Now let’s talk Star Wars: Imperial assault:
core game: about $110
dice for everybody? That’s an extra $12 per.
want expansions? That’s $50 to $75 each. If you want all of them, that’s about $375
want the “ally and villain packs”? That’s $15-$22 each. If we just count the ones still in print: That’s about $598
Fortunately all of the skirmish maps (at $25 each) are out of print so we’ve saved ourselves a further $325.
So the complete game, with all published parts currently available, is over a thousand bucks, which is utterly ludicrous for a mass market game that won’t even be remembered in a couple of decades (and whose components will have long rotted away before a century is out.
How ludicrous am I talking? For the price of this game that won’t survive a century as any kind of cultural icon (and whose components likely won’t last more than 30 years) I can buy a bespoke Xiangqi (Chinese Chess) set made of knotty red sandalwood with ornate, handmade mother-of-pearl inlay.
But this isn’t the entry price to play the game. If I just want to see if the game is even something I’m interested in, I can get a perfectly functional set for a little bit over fifty cents:
And even this el-cheapo set will outlast, probably, the thousand dollar Star Wars game aside from the thin board (which you can replicate easily with a piece of scrap wood, a pencil, and a ruler). And I also know the actual game will have legs considering the first known set of components was found in the archaeological record at 900 years ago or so, while mentions of it in literature go back almost 2500 years.
So here we have a game accessible to literally anybody ranging from the budget-conscious to the æsthetic fetishist, and that has proved popular across wildly different social classes for well over a thousand years. THIS is the kind of thing I wish the game industry would return to instead of ludicrous stuff like Star Wars: Imperial Assault, or Kingdom Death: Monsters, or Cthulhu Wars, or even the humble old Ogre. (In defence of Ogre, though, I have to say that at least it once had a cheap edition, and may still have.)
TL;DR summary: Stop making games for just rich folk if you want, you know, to expand the hobby, especially now that Trump’s tariffs are killing everything.
You know, like I said at the beginning of your blank incomprehension:
Tone, please. This is a friendly discussion, there’s no call to be getting riled up. If you are, I suggest stepping away for a bit, or just dropping it entirely.
As should be clear from my previous comment, I had no idea what your point is because
You brought up a game I had never heard of
It’s a game that’s 4 decades old
It released at a pretty average price
It’s currently a collectible, not a game in print / circulation, hence currently costs a lot
1st thing aside, I think it’s fairly obvious why I had no idea what your point was.
Anyway, moving on. We’re discussing the trend of the hobby as a whole. Not a single cherry picked product. Your argument and example is also pretty disingenous. It’s an entire series of products that’s been releasing in bits and pieces for a decade. A similar counter-example I could bring up would be Magic The Gathering. How much would it have cost to buy every single card WotC has released in the past 10 years? And that’s just cardboard. Obviously, cost of physical components has very little to do with RRP in the case of these games. Which invalidates the whole ‘Games would get cheaper if they used cheaper components’ argument.
These companies would argue that you’re not paying for the cost of the physical product, you’re paying for the design work, marketing, etc that goes into each release. Which to be fair, does exist to some extent. That said, the franchise owners are fairly obviously milking them for money hand over fist. The thing is, that’s hardly applicable to boardgame publishers as a whole.
Your other example, Chinese Chess, is also pretty bad for reasons: As you point out, it’s been around for millenia. Nobody’s getting paid to design and market the game. Without the need for marketing, distribution (which mostly involves getting it onto shelves in front of eyeballs and is essentially just another form of marketing), and royalties, modern games would also cost a fraction of what they currently cost. With the downside that, y’know, game publishers everywhere would starve to death and the entire game industry would collapse. I do think distribution takes way too huge a cut of the final cost, but that’s a major unrelated tangent.
TLDR: Respectfully disagreeing with your argument thus far because it’s pretty irrelevant to the actual topic at hand. I do actually agree that prices are going up, I just don’t think you’ve done a great job arguing your point. I’d love to continue discussing this, in a friendly manner. Actually, hold that thought. I’ll probably create a discussion post for this. It’s fairly interesting to see what people are thinking about this issue.
There are many people for whom the nice bits and pieces enhance their enjoyment of the game. I’m certainly one of them. I know others who take it a step further and will buy games just because they’re pretty / cute / whatever. It’s not a design issue, it’s appealing to a larger market.
If you’re “appealing to a larger market” by making the game so expensive that only a few can afford it, are you really getting a larger market? Or are you just deciding you want to cater to rich folk?
I’m with @drolex here. I think it may be time for board/card/whatever game designers to return to basics: making games that people play, not the board game equivalent of a coffee table book.
‘So expensive that only a few can afford it’ is pretty hyperbole. Boardgaming is one of the cheapest hobbies you can have, especially on a cost per time basis. I would much rather pay an extra few bucks for nicer pieces for a game that I’m going to enjoy for years and years.
I happen to run a boardgame club, and I can attest that pretty much everybody I’ve talked to about this topic feels the same way. Given the choice between a classic game with cardboard chits or a newer game with the same mechanics and prettier pieces, we’re playing the new one every time.
Haha yes, I play all of these boardgames more than once!
Our club copy of Bloodlines has gotten about 20 plays since we got it 2 weeks back 😂. Granted, that’s something of an outlier.
How much did the deluxe version of Ogre cost again?
No idea, had honestly never heard of that game before now.
$150 for a game consisting entirely of cardboard, essentially.
I’m not sure what your point is? According to bgg, it released in 1987 at a RRP of $17. I’m hoping the message is that my collection will pay for my early retirement.
https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgameversion/141924/english-deluxe-fourth-edition
The point is these are games MADE FOR RICH PEOPLE. You know, like I said at the beginning of your blank incomprehension:
$150 for an all cardboard game. Now let’s talk Star Wars: Imperial assault:
Fortunately all of the skirmish maps (at $25 each) are out of print so we’ve saved ourselves a further $325.
So the complete game, with all published parts currently available, is over a thousand bucks, which is utterly ludicrous for a mass market game that won’t even be remembered in a couple of decades (and whose components will have long rotted away before a century is out.
How ludicrous am I talking? For the price of this game that won’t survive a century as any kind of cultural icon (and whose components likely won’t last more than 30 years) I can buy a bespoke Xiangqi (Chinese Chess) set made of knotty red sandalwood with ornate, handmade mother-of-pearl inlay.
But this isn’t the entry price to play the game. If I just want to see if the game is even something I’m interested in, I can get a perfectly functional set for a little bit over fifty cents:
And even this el-cheapo set will outlast, probably, the thousand dollar Star Wars game aside from the thin board (which you can replicate easily with a piece of scrap wood, a pencil, and a ruler). And I also know the actual game will have legs considering the first known set of components was found in the archaeological record at 900 years ago or so, while mentions of it in literature go back almost 2500 years.
So here we have a game accessible to literally anybody ranging from the budget-conscious to the æsthetic fetishist, and that has proved popular across wildly different social classes for well over a thousand years. THIS is the kind of thing I wish the game industry would return to instead of ludicrous stuff like Star Wars: Imperial Assault, or Kingdom Death: Monsters, or Cthulhu Wars, or even the humble old Ogre. (In defence of Ogre, though, I have to say that at least it once had a cheap edition, and may still have.)
TL;DR summary: Stop making games for just rich folk if you want, you know, to expand the hobby, especially now that Trump’s tariffs are killing everything.
Tone, please. This is a friendly discussion, there’s no call to be getting riled up. If you are, I suggest stepping away for a bit, or just dropping it entirely.
As should be clear from my previous comment, I had no idea what your point is because
1st thing aside, I think it’s fairly obvious why I had no idea what your point was.
Anyway, moving on. We’re discussing the trend of the hobby as a whole. Not a single cherry picked product. Your argument and example is also pretty disingenous. It’s an entire series of products that’s been releasing in bits and pieces for a decade. A similar counter-example I could bring up would be Magic The Gathering. How much would it have cost to buy every single card WotC has released in the past 10 years? And that’s just cardboard. Obviously, cost of physical components has very little to do with RRP in the case of these games. Which invalidates the whole ‘Games would get cheaper if they used cheaper components’ argument.
These companies would argue that you’re not paying for the cost of the physical product, you’re paying for the design work, marketing, etc that goes into each release. Which to be fair, does exist to some extent. That said, the franchise owners are fairly obviously milking them for money hand over fist. The thing is, that’s hardly applicable to boardgame publishers as a whole.
Your other example, Chinese Chess, is also pretty bad for reasons: As you point out, it’s been around for millenia. Nobody’s getting paid to design and market the game. Without the need for marketing, distribution (which mostly involves getting it onto shelves in front of eyeballs and is essentially just another form of marketing), and royalties, modern games would also cost a fraction of what they currently cost. With the downside that, y’know, game publishers everywhere would starve to death and the entire game industry would collapse. I do think distribution takes way too huge a cut of the final cost, but that’s a major unrelated tangent.
TLDR: Respectfully disagreeing with your argument thus far because it’s pretty irrelevant to the actual topic at hand. I do actually agree that prices are going up, I just don’t think you’ve done a great job arguing your point. I’d love to continue discussing this, in a friendly manner. Actually, hold that thought. I’ll probably create a discussion post for this. It’s fairly interesting to see what people are thinking about this issue.