Talk:Internet Top 100 Games List

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Board and table games, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to board games and tabletop games. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

[edit] Maintenance

Because the statistics cited here change, this page should probably be updated every month. I will make an effort to remember to do that. Mike Church 16:37, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)

[edit] ambition

I went to the site and checked. There are other, higher ranked games than ambition, such as Squad 7, though not in the top 500. Including the "top averaged ranked game" from only the top 500 seemed like too much of a stretch -- kinda like the sports commentators who say things like "this is the only time a wide receiver has caught three touchdown passes for fewer than 30 yards in the first half of a regular-season game." Since the list is ephermal anyway and positions are moving constantly, it did not seem to me that the card game belonged.

UninvitedCompany 19:26, 7 May 2004 (UTC)

It's correct that "highest average in top 500" could be argued to indeed be arbitrary.

Ambition's average rating is 9.00, and there are indeed games with higher average ratings, though fewer votes. (For example, some games have precisely one rating of 10.) If you're going to remark that "best average in top 500" seems like a contrived category, especially since the game that fit it was one of my own, I won't argue with you. I'm not reverting that particular edit, so long as no further link-attack occurs on this page. Mike Church 19:31, 7 May 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Controversy

The fact that Monopoly scores so low is probably because once you get to know the better ones (Puerto Rico, Caylus, Tigris and Euphrates, El Grande, etc...) you get to realise how boring Monopoly really is... warpozio 11:48, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Consider who's submitting the rankings and what they really mean. Just because a game is ranked high doesn't mean it's a "good" game, it just means it's popular and well-liked amongst the people who submit entries. If someone were to run a well-designed public poll you'd get very different answers; Monopoly, Scrabble, Checkers, Chess, Sorry, Stratego, Trivial Pursuit, Chutes and Ladders, etc. would rank much higher, and Puerto Rico/Caylus/et al. would be somewhere off the bottom of the list entirely. The list is by and for the small group of "board game geeks".

To become a skilled Chess player you have to devote a significant amount of time to it, and there are enough expert-level players to disccourage the rest of us. Hence its low ranking. Almost anyone can become skilled at most of the top-listed games through frequent play, they don't require a lot of memorization or intense theoretical study. (That may change when the inevitable Puerto Rico tournaments start...)

It's also worth noting that most popular games are more luck than skill, and rarely involve any long-term strategies. Few people want to expend even the small amount of effort required to become good at a game like Puerto Rico; anyone of any skill level has a shot at winning a game of Monopoly.12.103.251.203 20:40, 27 November 2006 (UTC)