The last 5-10 years have seen an uptick in the trend of games having nicer and shinier bits and pieces. In my mind, the trend is best exemplified by Wingspan, which to me was a fairly average game wrapped in a beautiful package of glossy Cadbury eggs and pretty birds. I’m personally in favour of getting nicer bits and pieces for my games, but they are undeniably having an impact on prices (how much of an impact is something I’d find really interesting, let me know if any publisher has discussed the issue).
What do you think of this trend? Are you in favour of moving back to 100% cardboard chits, or do you like the newer, prettier boardgames?
I personally think of board games as a graphic design expression. I know there are good games hidden underneath bad or dry art, but I can’t interact with them if they don’t look good to me.
Regarding pieces, I don’t care much for plastic or wooden pieces, I care for things that make sense in terms of readability of the state of the board, and if a game comes with ultra-detailed miniatures but they are all gray, I’d rather have cardboard stand ins that help me differentiate them.
Having 2 options is good.
-
Basic all cardboard parts, with wooden meeples.
-
Deluxe edition with thicker play-pieces and fancier high-quality components.
It’s usually not practical, as most games do not sell enough to justify two print runs, and having different components means they’re essentially 2 separate products for all intents and purposes.
My singular preference is for basic cardboard pieces all-round with lowest shelf price possible.
Then, Etsy makers, 3D printing, or future deluxe editions(eg. Cyclades, CoB) can supply fancy pieces if required.
Also, if an updated edition is released, which contains an updated piece or two, it would be excellent practise of publishers, to offer those updated components as a free gift to 1st ed. buyers(eg. The Azul 1st-player token)
-
Generally good, but it seems like a lot of publishers mistake “nicer” for “bigger components and more plastic bits”
For example the super-deluxe Kingdom Builder is horrible to play because they greatly increased the board size and player area (crazy table hog), the cards are annoying to deal with because they’re huge, it’s really expensive, and now a fun 30 minute game is a 2 hour slog.
It has better table presence but … they kinda ruined it.
On the other hand a lot of games really needed just a bit more polish on the artwork (I’m looking at you, Glory to Rome, Brass, Global Mogul, and unfortunately many Mac Gerdts games.)
Have you seen the Glory To Rome Black Box edition? I think it had a limited run, but the design and artwork are absolutely beautiful! It’s such a contrast to the main version’s artwork!
I want this version bad.
I’ve only played once with the cartoony version art.
While it was fun, the theming is important, and this minimalist art would change the mood entirely.
Similarly, I love the Innovation 3rd ed. artwork and would not consider playing another edition.
I have a copy. It is some of my favorite game artworks in contrast to the original.
Very polarizing though. A lot of people hate it.
I mean, compare Foundations of Rome to Foundations of Metropolis. I think ‘Rome’ is a great example of these niceties taken to excess, whereas Metropolis is easier to fit - on your shelf and in your budget.
I think the pairing shows that the answer can be (or, before the tarrifs, could have been) both, but the way the industry and expectations moved, your ‘Wingspan’ example became Standard, rather than Deluxe.
I will buy a game just because it’s pretty. Give me more of hat rainbow art. Lisa Frank, the game.
I suppose it’s similar to videogames and movie special effects, right? If it’s just flashy with no thought beyond that then it’s just going to wind up being expensive and soon outdated, whereas a strong and effective art style can do much more with less
I was somewhat drawn to Wingspan because of the aesthetics while I was lookong to buy a gift for a couple of friends recently, but the reviews of the mechanics put me off a bit. I have since acquired a copy for other reasons and while I have not yet played much, it does seem over complicated for what it’s doing. I bought The Fox in the Forest for the couple instead and they seem to like that. It is very compact but everything has a lovely elegant style to it that was part of why I chose it
It’s good
I’m mostly happy with it, I like nice looking games, i like nice feeling components. In general i don’t think there’s a point in having those without great gameplay, but then again I bought Wyrmspan for the sole reason of ‘ooh pretty dragons!’ and was honestly surprised that I enjoy playing it too. Not that I expected the gameplay to be bad, I just don’t like competitive games.
I think the trend is simply game creators adapting to the market. There are more people who like and are willing to pay for nicer prettier games right now, that’s all. There are presumably also games being made that focus on mechanics only, just less than before?
Wingspan is probably the game I bust out for people who don’t play board games that much. It’s a simple game that looks pretty, and I’m okay with that
I imagine it’s a marketing thing; a more “premium” product might appeal to more people (some who might not otherwise be interested if it didn’t look nice) and can probably make more profit (which can be critical for a small manufacturer to stay afloat). I’d probably still buy the low budget version if given the option though!
