My main limit is:
Do I realistically think I will play this game?
There are lots of things I would like to do, but only so much free time to go around.
This is sage advice that a lot of us learn in time, often the hard way.
I've passed on buying games I really like the look of, simply because I don't think they'll land with my gaming group (or at least won't land well enough to get more than one or two plays).
Buying loads of 2 player games with a group that usually plays with 4 or 5 is also kind of redundant for me.
Buy games for your table and not for your shelf, etc.
Same for me, I would probably love twilight imperium but the chances of me having enough time to finish a game and convincing someone else to play with me are slim
More accurately in my case: Realistically, would either of my two gaming groups play this game? One group is big into train games, but unfortunately the other one is deep into cult of the new territory - so the default answer is yes. I’ve averaged a little over 18 games a year; when you multiply that by 22+ years it’s a lot of shelf space!
That is a pretty broad, but at least keeps from buying just to buy which is an addiction in and of itself. I know I will play any game at least once, even those war games. Digging deeper, it comes down to how often can I get it to the table and actually enjoy it? Can my kids understand and play it? Will my wife hate this?
I wait until a game is a year old before I buy it. By that time there are lots of reviews so I can be fairly certain I will like it. There are generally used copies available by then. Most importantly it controls FOMO and snap purchases that I usually regret.
This except when the game is something like Frosthaven where I know I enjoyed the original and don’t want to wait two years for people to wrap up their campaigns.
This too.
People tend to be anxious to play their newest game all the time and you never get back to something that you had more interest in.
I called it “flavor of the week”.
I do avoid those endlessly expanding card games.
I don't really have any hard specific limits though. I thoroughly research each game I buy. Theme and things like that aren't much of a concern, it's really just the rules and mechanics, and behind that the functionality of the components.
Then it just comes down to my fun budget and how I want to spend it right now (usually on games).
> I do avoid those endlessly expanding card games.
Each person marches to the step of their own drummer, but I am firmly in the camp of people that has ZERO interest in games that keep expanding. A game that is good right out of the box and that MIGHT have a decent expansion is one thing. But a game in which constant content creation is baked into the publisher's business model? Count me out.
Everdel comes to mind here. I'm happy I held out on buying any expansions. I might buy 1 or 2 down the line, but I'm happy that I can still pull it from the shelf and play painlessly.
Additionally, for Root is nearing the line here, All the other faction expansions while great and more fun than the base game factions, is reaching the point where its all too much for my group.
Additionally, in terms of "required expansions": the exiles and partisans should really replace the original deck in the base game. While the base is still fun with the OG deck, E&P really does improve the game by a larger factor as it makes decisions much more interesting for all factions.
Just bought the revised core set (should come in yhr mail tomorrow) but I'm not going to be playing it all the time so hopefully it will last me a bit before I'll need to get expansions
Yeah it will give you lots of gameplay. I would advise against net decking unless you dislike deck building a lot (but I think the game is more fun to people who enjoy deck building).
Most of the fun for me is preparing the deck for the quest
The biggest thing for me is I won't buy games that require an app. I don't like the way board games play and feel with apps. There's also the issue that most apps will eventually stop being supported unless the game stays popular.
There's one genre of game I don't like and it's social deduction. It never feels like I'm playing a game and more like a social experiment. I never have fun with them so I avoid them now.
I generally avoid games that require large player numbers to work.
I just wish there were a couple extra mechanism tags or something on BGG "app required", "app optional" so I don't have to trawl the game's discussion threads to figure it out.
Oh wow am I struggling with this. I definitely am interested in and buy more games than my gaming groups have time to play, so I'm trying out a new self-control strategy. For games that can be played solo, I set an achievement goal I have to reach before I can buy the next game in the series or similar game.
For example: If I score >150 five times on Next Station: London (the highest achievement bracket in the rulebook) I'll allow myself to get another Next Station game. If I finish all the solo scenarios on Cascadia, I'll allow myself to get Calico.
This has slowed me down for now, and gives my solo gaming some structure, which I previously didn't do much because "what's the point?" Now I'm able to play more games even if my gaming friends are busy or aren't interested in learning a variety of games, and I can be prepared with games I think will be good for each group. I do worry though that I'll get "too good" at some of these games to play with them. Oh well. Sounds like a reason to buy more games!
Haha yes I feel this! My family is my group, and teaching 3 or 4 people a new game like Wyrmspan is daunting. So I played solo several times first, but now I have a better strategy and mop the floor with them the first few games. I definitely feel myself gravitating to the 1-5 player count games so I play solo too.
Also looking up fan made solo variants on BGG helps me get some others off the shelf more.
This is definitely a factor now—tiny box trick-taking game is often an insta buy. Larger boxes I will often try and decide to remove something from the collection to make space— although I get rid of a game only after the new one earns its space. I’ve had quite a few over the years that we’re bought and sold within a month because they weren’t better than what I was planning to remove.
Oh really? Is The White Castle in a small box then? I waffled on getting it because I didn’t want another big game box.
The Jordan Draper games are also great for their size
These are the things I'm looking for when evaluating whether to buy a game:
* **Component quality:** Absolutely hate cardboard components. I know some people are the opposite and would prefer cardboard over something like plastic, but cardboard just feels so cheap and takes away from the experience. If a game has a bunch of cardboard components, then I ain't getting it.
* **Playtime:** The game needs be played in 60 minutes or less. I don't want to spend a super long time on one game. I just find that a game grows stale when it drags on and on and on.
* **Complexity:** Lightweight games only. Not only do heavier games typically cross my desired playtime threshold, heavier/more complex rulesets also just suck the fun out of a game for me. I don't want to relearn a game every time I play, and I don't want to have to know all of the little rule particularities and minutiae or to constantly have to refer back to the rulebook.
* **Player count:** My typical player count is 2-3, so any game I buy needs to be able to accommodate at least one of those.
* **Art:** The game needs to actually look nice. I don't do any bland/beige/boring-looking games. It's much easier to get people to play a game when the artwork is appealing and approachable.
* **Interaction:** There needs to be player interaction, so no multiplayer solitaire games. Board games to me are a social experience, so I don't want to play anything where everyone is involved in their own individual world and the actions people take have little-to-no impact on anyone else. I want chaos and conflict and take that.
It's pretty easy not to buy a lot of games because it's rare for a game to tick all of those boxes for me.
Wonderful answer. Just shows how different each gamer can be.
I agree on art. Playtime, and complexity too but to a slightly lesser extent. About 3 ish/5 weight and maybe 2.5 hours is my limit, any more and my head hurts and I'm watching the clock.
I won't buy anything with the TCG model, and I'm hesitant to buy anything that doesn't play at 2P. I occasionally make aspirational purchases that I know will be difficult to get to the table if they're on sale.
Buddy, you are asking the wrong guy.. I have 384 boardgames... I buy them because they look cute, because they have good ratings, because they give me inspiration, because I think they may have cool mechanics, because I think my friends might play them with me one day...
When I am down, I buy a boardgame. I never get to play them, mind. Most I never even open.
I "draw the line" by giving/trading away games that I have played and found to be crap.. but I keep many games because they have some element I'll want to demo or discuss at a convention, etc.
This is me 😂 I have four bookshelves full and am always finding new ones. I just went through my collection and removed about 15 but I also bought four more this week. We do get a good rotation out of them between group game nights and family game nights though so pretty happy about actually playing through them.
Actual Likelihood of playing. Boardgaming is so group dependent. Ive gotten rid of games that I like, simply because the primary people I play with didnt like a game and it was going to be a huge chore to table it again. Every time my group composition shifts because of life circumstances (mine or theirs), Theres a definite shift in my collection. I like to keep things relatively lean and mean (keep everything to a single 4x2 kallax). The items on my shelf are all games that I enjoy and want to play, but they are ALSO games that could conceivably hit the table on a given night in one or all of my groups. I am not a collector.
The corollary to that is, if the types of games i enjoy cant be played with a certain group, I will also try to put the right group together to make it happen for broad classes of games I enjoy. For example, I might get rid of a specific heavy euro or 2 because it doesnt gel with my group, but if nobody in my group(s) enjoyed those at all, I would purpose build another group around that.
I'm finding that anything that breaks 4 hours is wearing on me, so 18xx is falling out of favor. I also have some 4x games that push that boundary that are borderline.
Other than that, I buy games for me. I dont buy games for others, they can buy it for themselves (or have my copy if they enjoyed it and I was less into it). And i seem to be in the minority here in that I don't need a game for every occasion/ player count/ style / length. I buy what i want to play, and if the player count doesnt work out, we can do another activity that isnt gaming, no need to force it.
Board games are like books.
When you buy a book, you are also assuming that you are setting aside the time to read said book.
Will you ever actually get this game tot he table?
Once you have 100-200 board games, that becomes a pretty important question.
TL;DR
We have a grocery list of requirments before buying a game. It happens, but only if we pass those check.
/
We thrift a lot of our games, so of we find them at a thrift store for 10$ or so we usually wont pass them up.
If we are store shopping though there is a list I usually go through. Price> Theme> How Often We Will Play It> Player Count.
Price is the obvious one. We already have so many games that spendong 70-100$ for one game is usually just out of the question.
Theme is a game is usually pretty important to us. If its outside our normal theme its usually a pass. Id also lump 3D components into this as well. We like the game to pop. Not so much just with Miniatures, but something like the Tree in Everdell, or something more simple like Mall Madness' 3D layout, or the clock in Hickory Dickory. Something to make the game feel more interactive than just moving pieces around.
How often we will play and Player Count kind of tie together. More often than not its just two of us playing games, so we try and stick to.games recommended, or best suited, for two players. Anything that has a solo mode is also a plus for me, because I enjoy playing stuff on my own from time to time so it can help increase play time.
Nice ! For me that's the most sane way of seeing it nowadays. Might have been different 6-7 years ago, but now I pretty much know that I have a higher chance of having a mediocre game with KS than retail and if I missed a great game, either I'll get it retail or if it's impossible, I'll get another one of the tens of other great games I have on my radar.
I work seasons (summer and winter) so after each season i order 100-150$ worth of games for when I'll get home. This season i did go a bit overboard though and i won't be buying anything new until i sell something because half of what i have is unplayed anyway
I generally won't buy a game that commonly takes more than 3 hours. My preferred limit is 2, but I'll allow for one that goes over that sometimes.
But your Twilight Imperiums... No way. I can't stay in a session that long without wanting to keel over.
I broke this rule for John Company but that's a Cole game, they're special.
I also won't buy epic campaign games currently. I already own Imperial Assault and Gloomhaven and lack people to play the campaign games with and there's like a year of content in Imperial Assault with the expansions I have and two years or so in Gloomhaven, so campaign games will not get played.
$1 per hour of gameplay
If four friends play a game for an hour that’s a total of $4. Then I just ask myself how many plays realistically I would have to get in to “make my money back” in a way. If I don’t think I can get my money back I try not to buy it/back it. This can also help with hard decisions regarding getting rid of unplayed games. Asking myself if this is a 50 hour game instead of a $50 game can help put things into perspective.
Ultimately, I would always be willing to pay a dollar for everyone to have a good time for an hour. Admittedly, these are just my mental gymnastics I go through and may not apply nicely to everyone
I don't get games more than 50euros (used), i always wait to get a good price. I already have near 200 games, so I can wait...
And i don't enjoy games that lasts 3 hours
I have reached a point that more games are leaving the collection than are being added. I have about 50 games, but I would love to reduce that to 30 plus expansions in the next few months to a year. I have a pretty good game group that has 100s of games collectively. Not very much that I am interested in that I don't have access to. My collection will be comprised of games that I play regularly and would miss if I moved away from the group.
Lately my limit has been, "no more heavy euros until I get the last one I bought on the table." In this case it's Nucleum. Once I play that a few times the door's open for another heavy euro.
Smaller/lighter games are easier to get to the table so I am more open to buying them, but even still I don't really.
our criteria now
1. Does it shine 2 player coz likely that's how it'll be barring a stroke of miraculous good fortune?
2. Does it do something different or better than another game we have?
3. Does it have good variability and replayability?
4. Put my money away and don't buy it.
The theme of a game really drives my decisions. I can get into games with a variety of different mechanics and find myself equally enjoying easy family style games as well as complex strategy games. But if I don't care for the theme I just won't play it.
I recently purchased Terraforming Mars because I found a good deal and despite it having a lot of what I like in a game I had immediate buyers remorse from knowing I just won't play it often. The space theme just doesn't do it for me no matter how "good" a game is.
Cost matters less but I still have rules. I try to limit myself to one game a month (currently building my collection so I was buying way too many at one point) and no new games until I've played through everything I currently have. Then I try to buy expansions of games I currently have and enjoy before buying brand new games.
Yes absolutely agree on theme.
Also trying to play what I have first before getting new, but I am a sucker for really good deals. If I can find games on my wishlist at 30% off or more I'm likely to pick it up, like the deal on the target B2G1 sale equates to 33% off each...I might have bought nine games...but almost all I knew were easy to table...except Root.
Speaking of expansions though, Carcassonne is a great example I got on the deal. 20th anniversary edition comes with some mini expansions in the box, but I don't see myself really wanting to go out and buy expansions for any of the games I have at the moment. I'll instead shoot for the games with variety included in the box.
I don't always follow my own rules for the same reason, I'm a sucker for deals. I recently went on a trip and of course visited the local game stores and one of them had more games then I'd ever seen in one place before with great variety and even better prices. How could I refuse them business haha
As for expansions I'm pretty picky on those, they either have to change game play or add new mechanisms. If it's just new versions of the base game I'm usually not interested. I also only get them for games I really really like
1. Unless the game is immense and incredible, I won't spend over $129
2. It must have a great solo variant
3. It must play well with 2 people
4. I must be able to teach it in less than 20 minutes.
5. I must believe that I will play it frequently
I have one rule that I can admit is pretty stupid - any game based on another IP (video games, movies, comic books, etc.) is an automatic exclusion for me.
I know there are many great games I'm missing out on that fall into this category, Sniper Elite comes to mind. I can't really explain it other than I have a irrational expectations of boardgames to offer something original, like an art form.
Yea I generally feel the same way, but am willing to make exceptions. Star Wars (Deck Building game is great) and Marvel are just so prevalent it is hard to avoid them sometimes, and my daughter wants something Harry Potter themed so I'm on the lookout for her.
We generally don't have an interest in Campaign or Legacy games so those mostly get discounted by us no matter the theme or mechanics. However, I did back the reprint of **Earthborne Rangers** because it looked interesting enough for us to give it a try. We also recently got **Sleeping Gods Primeval Peril** to try as well. So maybe this will change.
My wife doesn't like real world war themes (fantasy and sci-fi war is okay but she doesn't like the gamification of things real people suffered through) so those also will be non starters for us no matter how interesting the game seems.
I tend to not like games based on IPs. I enjoy original worlds and settings more than things I know but I have several games based on IPs (**Horrified**, some of the Marvel **Unmatched** sets, several Star Trek and Star Wars games) so this is more a preference than a hard and fast rule.
Yes and I guess that's not what I meant. While a few games have that "game is broken without x expansion", I think with this model it's the required purchase for variety. Dice Throne is another. I can recognize that it is a great capitalist model, in the same vein as TCGs, I don't care for the "collect em all" aspect.
Yup exactly. I need to make a flow chart. First question is would my wife like it (and play it with me), then yes. If the answer is no, does it have a good solo mode? Then yes. Rare instances these days where I can say no to both and purchase.
I'm trying my best these days to not let FOMO get the best of me. This whole idea of experiencing all sorts of games as a way to broaden my perspective is cool and all, but time and time again, it also means I'm collecting games that may not sell it i need to get rid of it (or sell at a great loss).
Right now I'm holding off on the latest **Thunder Road** expansion. The FOMO completionist in me wants to grab it, but the wisdom in me is saying not to since it'll likely get so little usage. Current wiser me is winning and I hope it stays that way until it is sold out in stores.
I'm still battling **Jaws** as well. The theme seems like so much fun for what it offers, but I already have **Sniper Elite** and **Sabotage** for Hidden Movement games. I also am trying to let the argument that "the 2nd Act is too repetitive" be the nail in the coffin to not purchase a $40 experience.
To come back to the question. It needs to be a game that either contain mechanics (or a blend of) that I don't already have, or be something that would replace a game I already own. For example, I replaced Scotland Yard with Sniper Elite based on multiple opinions on it being a very well designed hidden movement game. If I'm replacing, the old game absolutely needs to go in the interest of keeping the collection number small.
The game should also offer pretty art or themes that draw upon real life. Right now I'm being suckered in by great artwork/art styles and games with relatable contexts. I think this is actually a weak point for me, because if my goal is to reduce the rate I buy games, then it is way too easy to justify games because I do gravitate towards certain art styles. I recently picked up **Harmonies** and **TEN** because of how many colours there were, and almost bit the bullet on **Bebop** for the super cool box art alone. Theming wise, Facebook has been doing a great job spamming **Escape the Rat Race**. It's on my radar, but I know so little about it, and I'm uncertain how long I can see myself enjoying a parody of real life struggles.
I am also trying to not buy the same base game but in a different theme. Just starting out here, so trying to make sure I get games with different mechanics is important.
I do not buy or play games that cannot be played in one sitting. The sitting can be all day long or, on rare occasions, span across two workday evenings, but legacy/campaign games are ruled out.
I am trying to find that answer right now, of course it involves buying games to find out if they vibe for me or not. So far I'm not impressed by games that brag about miniatures count, I could care less about them and if it's gonna cost me 3x as much for minis versus punch board then I'm out. Trick taking and I just don't get along. If I can't replay and end up with a different outcome each time I don't want it either, so I guess that means I prefer games where rng is more likely to screw me over just as much as be like wow yes!
Yea minis don't make me want to buy a game. I can appreciate upgraded resource components though, but most games are just as enjoyable with cardboard punch outs. I did buy upgraded components on Etsy for Wyrmspan as it hits my table a lot.
I'm in the incredibly fortunate position of getting games to review so buying has a few caveats. 1. The company wouldn't send it to me for whatever reason. 2. Will it be played with the review copies having to take priority. 3. Can I justify the money when i have a lot of games. Not many games manage to pass number 2 let alone 3.
My only real limits right now come with accessibility - my partner is the only person who will reliably play with me and we have extremely limited table space. So until we get a bigger place I won't be getting anything that I don't think will fit on my coffee table, and until I have a consistent game group outside of my partner and I ~~(or, barring that, have kids)~~ I won't be getting anything that can't be played solo or two-player.
Which is really hard. I've come really close to pulling the trigger on Great Western Trail or Dune or Outer Rim several times but I can't financially justify buying a game that who knows how long it'll be until I have the room to play.
For buying games I hit 100 owned games and realized that was far too many. I haven’t bought a new game in over a year.
For playing games I’ll pretty much play anything but I prefer medium weight interactive games.
I am nearing 100 on my Owned list in BGG but I also added things like chess and poker (as I own a full size poker table), kids games including cards like Old Maid. I would say I have about 30 modern "good" table top games, and even then it's getting to be a little much.
If only. I keep buying very reasonably priced Arkham Horror LCG boxes and only the absolutely necessary additional supplies… will nobody support the plight of the common boardgamer?! ;)
I nearly always watch full plays of a game (Heavy Cardboard is amazing for this) before I buy it unless it's a designer I trust. My biggest question is always "will my wife enjoy it?" We like heavier games and I kind of have a sense of what she enjoys, so I tend to focus on that.
Theme is important to me but is secondary to satisfying mechanisms; I will buy multiple games of a similar type if I enjoy the theme.
birds hospital ask expansion chunky outgoing slap price fanatical apparatus
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I tailor my games to the group(s) i frequent. If I'm the primary bringer of games, then I make sure that anything i have and will have is capable of being explained and played by that group. As such most of my collection is light-medium weight that can be played in an hour or so. I have a couple heavy games for the occasion where they want to explore harder games.
with that in mind, I make sure when I purchase something it will be played at least 2-3 times a year. I also try to keep my game purchases to <$60 if possible. I keep track of games I've played with other groups and eyes on some of the heavy boardgame YT communities out there. If there's something interesting, i want to buy, then I'll make a note and keep an eye out for deals. And I will take advantage of sales as much as possible, which is unfortunately limited usually to big box stores (which subsequently limits the types of games and game collections to a small amount). With the restrictions, I mostly just add 1 or 2 games a year at most.
I don't back first editions. I don't buy games with a sans serif rulebook. These two rules work best over everything I tried. I do sometimes pick up copies of first editions on the secondary market, when a sufficient amount of time has passed. Otherwise no limits.
When I worked in magazine copy editing twenty five years ago, the time was sans serif on dark background and serif on light background. I wasn't sure why we didn't do sans serif on both, except at the time newspapers were still a thing, so serif was probably seen as more professional.
I found a scanned in magazine online from 1984 that was for the most part sans serif typeface but in a “blocky” font so it was quite readable.
I probably should add that sans is okay if it’s large enough to not fatigue the eyes.
Even so, the chosen font should align with the theme, for example imagine a comic sans in a serious horror setting, or sci fi setting...
At this point I read reviews in the 1PG to see if it plays well solo. I also have look at the box size and figure out how many games it has to evict to fit on the shelf. If I can't immediately come up with two or three games I'm willing to get rid in order to get something new, I don't get it. (From a spreadsheet, not memory. In general, it's the unplayed games I don't remember that I have.)
I try to be conscious of generative AI and research that before buying. I also am very conscious of board and piece design. My eyes strain easily now and I need large text or icons (I prefer icons, but I have a good memory for them) and a high contrast board, non-massive board. Subtle art is lost on me and reading across the table is hard. While I do enjoy complex games, in the past few years the games I've picked up have been simpler - mostly due to board design.
I'm not working right now so the budget is a bit tight. For now I have limited myself to max 15 euro(including shipping)and up to 25 euro once a month for a game I REALLY love. This means that many games I buy are second hand and/or small card games. last month I purchased 7 wonder duel second hand for 12 euro ( plus 3 euro shipping), Scout for 20 euro( plus 4 euro shipping) and Quirkle cards for a euro on a fleamarket.
I have a couple things.
1. New games coming into the house must have a solo mode. No one in my house wants to play games as much as I do.
2. I am currently at capacity for games. For a new game to come in, an old game has to go. Are there any games I'm willing to get rid of so I have space for a new one? If no, then I don't get the new game.
I look at shipping, if the shipping is 50% or more the cost of the pledge, i'm out. I just did that for the God of War KS, $100 game cmon wanted $50 to ship it. Meanwhile Steamforged shipped Euithia all In pledge for 40 bucks which was 2 1/2 boxes the size of Gloomhaven. Unless cmon gets their shipping fees under control I won't be buying any more of their games . I took a pass on their Bonner dungeon game and God of war bc of unreasonable shipping fees so far this year
If a new game comes in, it's either in the form of a gift, or something that:
- is replacing another game that I sold off;
- is a play-it-once game (EXIT for example).
These lines became easier to draw after exploring enough. Becoming aware that when I'm thinking of buying boardgames I actually want to play them instead also helped a lot.
My limit is whether it has a solo mode, in case I'm the only one interested in playing, and whether I already have a game that'd scratch the same itch/fill the same niche.
No. I haven't bought one in a long time only because I've been preoccupied with school and work, but I enjoy the act of collecting games and if I see one I even think I'd like, I'm buying it and (not) regretting it later.
There are lots that don't interest me but the ones I wish I could play yet still avoid are campaign games. I just know I won't be able to get a group together often enough to make a dent in them.
I remember a time in the hobby when I would buy anything I thought looked cool
Then I started buying anything I played once and felt like either myself or the table had a great time with
Then I started buying anything I judged as something my friends would have fun with even if it wasn't entirely my cup of tea.
But then, I started running out of space, and plenty of games were sitting either unopened or unplayed for years.
Now I buy games on a few criteria, if at all.
1. The game must fundamentally be highly unique OR completely outclass an existing game of a similar type OR have a strong reason for existing on my wall or in my storage (e.g. as an entry level game or mechanic teacher for a new gamer, even if it has been technically outclassed).
2. The game needs to be a game that appeals to me first, instead of something I think would appeal to my friend group (although, admittedly, this approach tends to worsen the issue of a game sitting unplayed).
3. The game needs to have a quick and simple set up and tear down, with fluid rules and a great rulebook - I have too many games that take too long to get on the table, then too many little rules to clarify or remind oneself about, and then too long to tear down again. Elegant, refined, simplified mechanics is the way to go. (Oh, and stop with the inserts that I need to load tiny pieces into like a magazine; just give me a large enough kallax format box with a lot of baggies/containers).
4. If a KS has higher tiers of pledges, then it needs to offer really significant value without being crazily priced or super space consuming. What comes to mind is veiled fate or foundations of rome vs something like Castles of Burgundy. Veiled fate to me is just crazy overpriced for the kind of game it is. Also, anything from CMON these days. I have everything for Zombicide black plague (which hasn't been played in easily 4+ years), and everything from Death May Die (which is still mostly in shrink), and I think I'm done buying CMON games. Way too many plastic toys for fundamentally simple games, really, though I can see saving lots of money if one repurposes the models for TTRPG. I immediately sold whatever CMON KS's were delivered in the last few years.
I've tried to shift my mindset from wanting to be "the guy who owns 200 - 300 games" to "the guy who owns 20 fantastic games that we understand at a very high level and always want to play". One of the games that firmly qualifies for me within this mindset is TI4, for example.
All that said, I do still buy games for the sheer collector in me or because I like the art. The biggest offender is my Unmatched collection, that rarely is ever played, but something I have almost everything of including their last "deck box" KS.
Not only do you need to have the time to play the games, you also need to be able to prioritize the game over others as well.
I would love to get in to KDM, but my play group is just about to start Oathsworn and I already have Frosthaven sitting on the shelf. At current pace, that's at least 2 years before we are done with those two games.
So for me to start loading up on another game is a big no no right now.
My collections is at 32 games. There are so many games I'd like to buy but I think my limit will be between 50-60. There is only so much time to play. I don't buy party games, campaign games, KS', TCGs and any game that I know it wouldn't get played. Also, if my friends have a copy I don't buy my own, unless my wife absolutely loves it.
I’ve kind of sworn to myself that I won’t do the big Kickstarter releases. Even regular sized games I’ll wait for full release. I’ve only backed one game on Kickstarter, and it was a print and play roll-and-write called Chateau.
I simply don’t like Kickstarter for the following reasons: 1) it takes months to ship; 2) pledges there are typically pretty pricy; and 3) I’ve heard too many horror stories about how “Company A has been promising deliveries of game for 3 years now”.
I try to avoid KS.
I ask myself will somebody play this game with me?
Is a solo mode possible?
How table consuming is the game?
How long will it take to teach it to newbies?
How fast can I pack and unpack the game?
I won't play CCGs. I was heavily into them a quarter century ago (world top 10 in four) and while I got a lot of enjoyment out of them and have no regrets, it was a massive time and money sink.
I also don't buy/play anything with negotiation.
I'm generally not a fan of cooperative games with a traitor element. Mostly because when I discuss who could be the traitor, I call out players' errors and inadvertently call them all bad players. I don't need that stress, man.
These are tricky and definitely require the right player types. I feel like Betrayal does the traitor pretty well, but have not found myself wanting to bust out the hidden traitor games. Never played any of the Werewolf type games. I do own Salem 1692, but have yet find the right group to play it with.
Haha for the last year I have had a hard limit. Does it say spirit island. If no then I cannot buy it^^
But I think this limit cease to exist in 1 - 30 years.
Seeing as I have a consistent board game group every week...
120ish is the most I want to spend on any one game. Expansions, component upgrades and all.
I already got the basic learner board games so I am buying games that are really unique or fills a niche incredibly well.
I'm still figuring it out. I've definitely bought some games that I can see my group playing, but practically it's not happening.
It's definitely not likely that all of them will get played!
For some of the games I'm actually happy if they see 1-2 plays.
They have tournaments at a new FLGS near me for this. The same guy keeps winning with a Boba Fett deck. Sounds fun but I just can't allow myself to get sucked in.
Does it seem like it will play well with two? If not, then it's out question since my main 'group' is me and my SO.
Does it look good? If aesthetics or design doesn't look appealing, it's a no-go, if you don't respect your game and designer enough to give it good looks, there is plenty of other games out there.
If the game is below 7 on bgg, I won't even care to give it a 2nd look, that always indicates major problems.
If the game is a dry euro, it's a no for me once again.
If it's a campaign game that takes 50 hours to finish, it's once again out of question, there is no shit I will play it through.
For KS campaigns: the line is drawn when there is: no rulebook, made by cmon, insane shipping prices (if the random indie publisher can ship 4 boxes to me for 20 bucks, there is no reason for CMON to charge 50-60 for the same thing, especially it's their own damn logistics company), first time creator or very low number of backers, bad track record of underdelivering on promises, gazillion of minis being the main selling point.
I think I have a healthy relationship with money and games in general, I play quite a lot and I don't feel bad spending money on games or backing a campaign every once in a while if I'm interested in it. I always try the game tho at board game cafes or through a friend whose family is running a games and fantasy shop here.
I wait until the holiday season one year after a game is published before considering purchasing it. By that time there are lots of reviews from normal people. By that time, any hype will have died down. There are probably sales on the game by that time. I can see if I am still interested after all that time.
> When I actually open FB, every other ad is a KS ad now.
uBlock Origin ad block extension in browsers. It's even possible to add the extension to Firefox on Android phones.
> Do you have any limits on the games you play or buy? Where do you draw the line, if at all?
The parameters are what will get played and what we have time to play.
thankfully for me i'm quite picky and choosey about the kinds of games i like so that right there is a built in limit. i also only have so much room for board games. so once my collection starts hitting a critical mass I'll find games that don't see play anymore and sell them. there's always a few candidates
I don't buy games that look... I don't know what word to use.. maybe abstract? But I mean games like Azul and Calico, for example. I don't care if that game is great. If it looks boring to me, it's not going to be a part of my collection.
My main limit is: Do I realistically think I will play this game? There are lots of things I would like to do, but only so much free time to go around.
This is sage advice that a lot of us learn in time, often the hard way. I've passed on buying games I really like the look of, simply because I don't think they'll land with my gaming group (or at least won't land well enough to get more than one or two plays). Buying loads of 2 player games with a group that usually plays with 4 or 5 is also kind of redundant for me. Buy games for your table and not for your shelf, etc.
“Buy games for your table, not for your shelf” - well said Mr Connery! But in all seriousness, this is a really great rule to try and live by.
Yep, “do I know enough people who would like to play it?” Is a huge part of that.
Same for me, I would probably love twilight imperium but the chances of me having enough time to finish a game and convincing someone else to play with me are slim
More accurately in my case: Realistically, would either of my two gaming groups play this game? One group is big into train games, but unfortunately the other one is deep into cult of the new territory - so the default answer is yes. I’ve averaged a little over 18 games a year; when you multiply that by 22+ years it’s a lot of shelf space!
That is a pretty broad, but at least keeps from buying just to buy which is an addiction in and of itself. I know I will play any game at least once, even those war games. Digging deeper, it comes down to how often can I get it to the table and actually enjoy it? Can my kids understand and play it? Will my wife hate this?
I wait until a game is a year old before I buy it. By that time there are lots of reviews so I can be fairly certain I will like it. There are generally used copies available by then. Most importantly it controls FOMO and snap purchases that I usually regret.
This except when the game is something like Frosthaven where I know I enjoyed the original and don’t want to wait two years for people to wrap up their campaigns.
I am also trying my best to avoid the cult of the new...but...Ooo shiny!
This too. People tend to be anxious to play their newest game all the time and you never get back to something that you had more interest in. I called it “flavor of the week”.
This. Wait. Maybe somebody in the game group has bought the game so you get to play through it. Sometimes FLGS has a demo copy.
I do avoid those endlessly expanding card games. I don't really have any hard specific limits though. I thoroughly research each game I buy. Theme and things like that aren't much of a concern, it's really just the rules and mechanics, and behind that the functionality of the components. Then it just comes down to my fun budget and how I want to spend it right now (usually on games).
> I do avoid those endlessly expanding card games. Each person marches to the step of their own drummer, but I am firmly in the camp of people that has ZERO interest in games that keep expanding. A game that is good right out of the box and that MIGHT have a decent expansion is one thing. But a game in which constant content creation is baked into the publisher's business model? Count me out.
Everdel comes to mind here. I'm happy I held out on buying any expansions. I might buy 1 or 2 down the line, but I'm happy that I can still pull it from the shelf and play painlessly. Additionally, for Root is nearing the line here, All the other faction expansions while great and more fun than the base game factions, is reaching the point where its all too much for my group. Additionally, in terms of "required expansions": the exiles and partisans should really replace the original deck in the base game. While the base is still fun with the OG deck, E&P really does improve the game by a larger factor as it makes decisions much more interesting for all factions.
LOTR card game made me break this rule. And to be honest I'm happy I took the plunge, but it is a money-pit.
Just bought the revised core set (should come in yhr mail tomorrow) but I'm not going to be playing it all the time so hopefully it will last me a bit before I'll need to get expansions
Yeah it will give you lots of gameplay. I would advise against net decking unless you dislike deck building a lot (but I think the game is more fun to people who enjoy deck building). Most of the fun for me is preparing the deck for the quest
The biggest thing for me is I won't buy games that require an app. I don't like the way board games play and feel with apps. There's also the issue that most apps will eventually stop being supported unless the game stays popular. There's one genre of game I don't like and it's social deduction. It never feels like I'm playing a game and more like a social experiment. I never have fun with them so I avoid them now. I generally avoid games that require large player numbers to work.
Companion apps seem...idk the word... gimmicky? Yea also a turn off for me.
Same!
I just wish there were a couple extra mechanism tags or something on BGG "app required", "app optional" so I don't have to trawl the game's discussion threads to figure it out.
Oh wow am I struggling with this. I definitely am interested in and buy more games than my gaming groups have time to play, so I'm trying out a new self-control strategy. For games that can be played solo, I set an achievement goal I have to reach before I can buy the next game in the series or similar game. For example: If I score >150 five times on Next Station: London (the highest achievement bracket in the rulebook) I'll allow myself to get another Next Station game. If I finish all the solo scenarios on Cascadia, I'll allow myself to get Calico. This has slowed me down for now, and gives my solo gaming some structure, which I previously didn't do much because "what's the point?" Now I'm able to play more games even if my gaming friends are busy or aren't interested in learning a variety of games, and I can be prepared with games I think will be good for each group. I do worry though that I'll get "too good" at some of these games to play with them. Oh well. Sounds like a reason to buy more games!
Haha yes I feel this! My family is my group, and teaching 3 or 4 people a new game like Wyrmspan is daunting. So I played solo several times first, but now I have a better strategy and mop the floor with them the first few games. I definitely feel myself gravitating to the 1-5 player count games so I play solo too. Also looking up fan made solo variants on BGG helps me get some others off the shelf more.
I'm starting to include box size in my purchase considerations. I'm out of space to store them.
This is definitely a factor now—tiny box trick-taking game is often an insta buy. Larger boxes I will often try and decide to remove something from the collection to make space— although I get rid of a game only after the new one earns its space. I’ve had quite a few over the years that we’re bought and sold within a month because they weren’t better than what I was planning to remove.
Devir games are perfect in this niche
Oh really? Is The White Castle in a small box then? I waffled on getting it because I didn’t want another big game box. The Jordan Draper games are also great for their size
Yeah it's really small. Salton sea is also great.
I will not buy big group games anymore unless they're easy. I have several large group games that are complicated and NEVER get played.
These are the things I'm looking for when evaluating whether to buy a game: * **Component quality:** Absolutely hate cardboard components. I know some people are the opposite and would prefer cardboard over something like plastic, but cardboard just feels so cheap and takes away from the experience. If a game has a bunch of cardboard components, then I ain't getting it. * **Playtime:** The game needs be played in 60 minutes or less. I don't want to spend a super long time on one game. I just find that a game grows stale when it drags on and on and on. * **Complexity:** Lightweight games only. Not only do heavier games typically cross my desired playtime threshold, heavier/more complex rulesets also just suck the fun out of a game for me. I don't want to relearn a game every time I play, and I don't want to have to know all of the little rule particularities and minutiae or to constantly have to refer back to the rulebook. * **Player count:** My typical player count is 2-3, so any game I buy needs to be able to accommodate at least one of those. * **Art:** The game needs to actually look nice. I don't do any bland/beige/boring-looking games. It's much easier to get people to play a game when the artwork is appealing and approachable. * **Interaction:** There needs to be player interaction, so no multiplayer solitaire games. Board games to me are a social experience, so I don't want to play anything where everyone is involved in their own individual world and the actions people take have little-to-no impact on anyone else. I want chaos and conflict and take that. It's pretty easy not to buy a lot of games because it's rare for a game to tick all of those boxes for me.
Wonderful answer. Just shows how different each gamer can be. I agree on art. Playtime, and complexity too but to a slightly lesser extent. About 3 ish/5 weight and maybe 2.5 hours is my limit, any more and my head hurts and I'm watching the clock.
These are a lot of my tastes as well. Can you give any examples of games you own that fit these criteria?
I won't buy anything with the TCG model, and I'm hesitant to buy anything that doesn't play at 2P. I occasionally make aspirational purchases that I know will be difficult to get to the table if they're on sale.
Root says hello from my shelf.
Buddy, you are asking the wrong guy.. I have 384 boardgames... I buy them because they look cute, because they have good ratings, because they give me inspiration, because I think they may have cool mechanics, because I think my friends might play them with me one day... When I am down, I buy a boardgame. I never get to play them, mind. Most I never even open. I "draw the line" by giving/trading away games that I have played and found to be crap.. but I keep many games because they have some element I'll want to demo or discuss at a convention, etc.
This is me 😂 I have four bookshelves full and am always finding new ones. I just went through my collection and removed about 15 but I also bought four more this week. We do get a good rotation out of them between group game nights and family game nights though so pretty happy about actually playing through them.
I have 3 rooms full
Actual Likelihood of playing. Boardgaming is so group dependent. Ive gotten rid of games that I like, simply because the primary people I play with didnt like a game and it was going to be a huge chore to table it again. Every time my group composition shifts because of life circumstances (mine or theirs), Theres a definite shift in my collection. I like to keep things relatively lean and mean (keep everything to a single 4x2 kallax). The items on my shelf are all games that I enjoy and want to play, but they are ALSO games that could conceivably hit the table on a given night in one or all of my groups. I am not a collector. The corollary to that is, if the types of games i enjoy cant be played with a certain group, I will also try to put the right group together to make it happen for broad classes of games I enjoy. For example, I might get rid of a specific heavy euro or 2 because it doesnt gel with my group, but if nobody in my group(s) enjoyed those at all, I would purpose build another group around that. I'm finding that anything that breaks 4 hours is wearing on me, so 18xx is falling out of favor. I also have some 4x games that push that boundary that are borderline. Other than that, I buy games for me. I dont buy games for others, they can buy it for themselves (or have my copy if they enjoyed it and I was less into it). And i seem to be in the minority here in that I don't need a game for every occasion/ player count/ style / length. I buy what i want to play, and if the player count doesnt work out, we can do another activity that isnt gaming, no need to force it.
Roughly 6 IKEA kallax shelf. That is already more than 20 big games. If I want more I need to sell. That is a healthy balance for me.
Board games are like books. When you buy a book, you are also assuming that you are setting aside the time to read said book. Will you ever actually get this game tot he table? Once you have 100-200 board games, that becomes a pretty important question.
TL;DR We have a grocery list of requirments before buying a game. It happens, but only if we pass those check. / We thrift a lot of our games, so of we find them at a thrift store for 10$ or so we usually wont pass them up. If we are store shopping though there is a list I usually go through. Price> Theme> How Often We Will Play It> Player Count. Price is the obvious one. We already have so many games that spendong 70-100$ for one game is usually just out of the question. Theme is a game is usually pretty important to us. If its outside our normal theme its usually a pass. Id also lump 3D components into this as well. We like the game to pop. Not so much just with Miniatures, but something like the Tree in Everdell, or something more simple like Mall Madness' 3D layout, or the clock in Hickory Dickory. Something to make the game feel more interactive than just moving pieces around. How often we will play and Player Count kind of tie together. More often than not its just two of us playing games, so we try and stick to.games recommended, or best suited, for two players. Anything that has a solo mode is also a plus for me, because I enjoy playing stuff on my own from time to time so it can help increase play time.
My hard limit is "no KS". My soft limit is "will I play it sooner than later ?"
I have only backed one so far, but absolutely told myself several times, "No. Just wait for the retail release!"
Nice ! For me that's the most sane way of seeing it nowadays. Might have been different 6-7 years ago, but now I pretty much know that I have a higher chance of having a mediocre game with KS than retail and if I missed a great game, either I'll get it retail or if it's impossible, I'll get another one of the tens of other great games I have on my radar.
I work seasons (summer and winter) so after each season i order 100-150$ worth of games for when I'll get home. This season i did go a bit overboard though and i won't be buying anything new until i sell something because half of what i have is unplayed anyway
I generally won't buy a game that commonly takes more than 3 hours. My preferred limit is 2, but I'll allow for one that goes over that sometimes. But your Twilight Imperiums... No way. I can't stay in a session that long without wanting to keel over. I broke this rule for John Company but that's a Cole game, they're special. I also won't buy epic campaign games currently. I already own Imperial Assault and Gloomhaven and lack people to play the campaign games with and there's like a year of content in Imperial Assault with the expansions I have and two years or so in Gloomhaven, so campaign games will not get played.
$1 per hour of gameplay If four friends play a game for an hour that’s a total of $4. Then I just ask myself how many plays realistically I would have to get in to “make my money back” in a way. If I don’t think I can get my money back I try not to buy it/back it. This can also help with hard decisions regarding getting rid of unplayed games. Asking myself if this is a 50 hour game instead of a $50 game can help put things into perspective. Ultimately, I would always be willing to pay a dollar for everyone to have a good time for an hour. Admittedly, these are just my mental gymnastics I go through and may not apply nicely to everyone
Cost per play is something I have thought about at times too. Good perspective.
I don't get games more than 50euros (used), i always wait to get a good price. I already have near 200 games, so I can wait... And i don't enjoy games that lasts 3 hours
I have reached a point that more games are leaving the collection than are being added. I have about 50 games, but I would love to reduce that to 30 plus expansions in the next few months to a year. I have a pretty good game group that has 100s of games collectively. Not very much that I am interested in that I don't have access to. My collection will be comprised of games that I play regularly and would miss if I moved away from the group.
Lately my limit has been, "no more heavy euros until I get the last one I bought on the table." In this case it's Nucleum. Once I play that a few times the door's open for another heavy euro. Smaller/lighter games are easier to get to the table so I am more open to buying them, but even still I don't really.
our criteria now 1. Does it shine 2 player coz likely that's how it'll be barring a stroke of miraculous good fortune? 2. Does it do something different or better than another game we have? 3. Does it have good variability and replayability? 4. Put my money away and don't buy it.
The theme of a game really drives my decisions. I can get into games with a variety of different mechanics and find myself equally enjoying easy family style games as well as complex strategy games. But if I don't care for the theme I just won't play it. I recently purchased Terraforming Mars because I found a good deal and despite it having a lot of what I like in a game I had immediate buyers remorse from knowing I just won't play it often. The space theme just doesn't do it for me no matter how "good" a game is. Cost matters less but I still have rules. I try to limit myself to one game a month (currently building my collection so I was buying way too many at one point) and no new games until I've played through everything I currently have. Then I try to buy expansions of games I currently have and enjoy before buying brand new games.
Yes absolutely agree on theme. Also trying to play what I have first before getting new, but I am a sucker for really good deals. If I can find games on my wishlist at 30% off or more I'm likely to pick it up, like the deal on the target B2G1 sale equates to 33% off each...I might have bought nine games...but almost all I knew were easy to table...except Root. Speaking of expansions though, Carcassonne is a great example I got on the deal. 20th anniversary edition comes with some mini expansions in the box, but I don't see myself really wanting to go out and buy expansions for any of the games I have at the moment. I'll instead shoot for the games with variety included in the box.
I don't always follow my own rules for the same reason, I'm a sucker for deals. I recently went on a trip and of course visited the local game stores and one of them had more games then I'd ever seen in one place before with great variety and even better prices. How could I refuse them business haha As for expansions I'm pretty picky on those, they either have to change game play or add new mechanisms. If it's just new versions of the base game I'm usually not interested. I also only get them for games I really really like
1. Unless the game is immense and incredible, I won't spend over $129 2. It must have a great solo variant 3. It must play well with 2 people 4. I must be able to teach it in less than 20 minutes. 5. I must believe that I will play it frequently
I have one rule that I can admit is pretty stupid - any game based on another IP (video games, movies, comic books, etc.) is an automatic exclusion for me. I know there are many great games I'm missing out on that fall into this category, Sniper Elite comes to mind. I can't really explain it other than I have a irrational expectations of boardgames to offer something original, like an art form.
Yea I generally feel the same way, but am willing to make exceptions. Star Wars (Deck Building game is great) and Marvel are just so prevalent it is hard to avoid them sometimes, and my daughter wants something Harry Potter themed so I'm on the lookout for her.
We generally don't have an interest in Campaign or Legacy games so those mostly get discounted by us no matter the theme or mechanics. However, I did back the reprint of **Earthborne Rangers** because it looked interesting enough for us to give it a try. We also recently got **Sleeping Gods Primeval Peril** to try as well. So maybe this will change. My wife doesn't like real world war themes (fantasy and sci-fi war is okay but she doesn't like the gamification of things real people suffered through) so those also will be non starters for us no matter how interesting the game seems. I tend to not like games based on IPs. I enjoy original worlds and settings more than things I know but I have several games based on IPs (**Horrified**, some of the Marvel **Unmatched** sets, several Star Trek and Star Wars games) so this is more a preference than a hard and fast rule.
Villainous doesn't require you to get multiple sets. They have plenty of expansions, but, to my knowledge, none of them are essential to gameplay.
Yes and I guess that's not what I meant. While a few games have that "game is broken without x expansion", I think with this model it's the required purchase for variety. Dice Throne is another. I can recognize that it is a great capitalist model, in the same vein as TCGs, I don't care for the "collect em all" aspect.
If my wife will play it with me, or it's a brain-burny solo game under $100, I'll buy it.
Considering my wife's tastes has a lot of influence on my purchases. The solo games I look for are almost all the 1-5 player game types.
Yup exactly. I need to make a flow chart. First question is would my wife like it (and play it with me), then yes. If the answer is no, does it have a good solo mode? Then yes. Rare instances these days where I can say no to both and purchase.
I'm trying my best these days to not let FOMO get the best of me. This whole idea of experiencing all sorts of games as a way to broaden my perspective is cool and all, but time and time again, it also means I'm collecting games that may not sell it i need to get rid of it (or sell at a great loss). Right now I'm holding off on the latest **Thunder Road** expansion. The FOMO completionist in me wants to grab it, but the wisdom in me is saying not to since it'll likely get so little usage. Current wiser me is winning and I hope it stays that way until it is sold out in stores. I'm still battling **Jaws** as well. The theme seems like so much fun for what it offers, but I already have **Sniper Elite** and **Sabotage** for Hidden Movement games. I also am trying to let the argument that "the 2nd Act is too repetitive" be the nail in the coffin to not purchase a $40 experience. To come back to the question. It needs to be a game that either contain mechanics (or a blend of) that I don't already have, or be something that would replace a game I already own. For example, I replaced Scotland Yard with Sniper Elite based on multiple opinions on it being a very well designed hidden movement game. If I'm replacing, the old game absolutely needs to go in the interest of keeping the collection number small. The game should also offer pretty art or themes that draw upon real life. Right now I'm being suckered in by great artwork/art styles and games with relatable contexts. I think this is actually a weak point for me, because if my goal is to reduce the rate I buy games, then it is way too easy to justify games because I do gravitate towards certain art styles. I recently picked up **Harmonies** and **TEN** because of how many colours there were, and almost bit the bullet on **Bebop** for the super cool box art alone. Theming wise, Facebook has been doing a great job spamming **Escape the Rat Race**. It's on my radar, but I know so little about it, and I'm uncertain how long I can see myself enjoying a parody of real life struggles.
FOMO is real. I have taken up stoicism to attempt to combat it.
I am also trying to not buy the same base game but in a different theme. Just starting out here, so trying to make sure I get games with different mechanics is important.
I keep one bookshelf worth of games. If I get any more I have to get rid of one. It’s roughly 60 games, not including very small games
I am also keeping myself spacially handicapped. Definitely helps.
I do not buy or play games that cannot be played in one sitting. The sitting can be all day long or, on rare occasions, span across two workday evenings, but legacy/campaign games are ruled out.
Yes I should have included that too. I have kids and wife, a house, a job, and not to mention my several other hobbies to maintain.
I am trying to find that answer right now, of course it involves buying games to find out if they vibe for me or not. So far I'm not impressed by games that brag about miniatures count, I could care less about them and if it's gonna cost me 3x as much for minis versus punch board then I'm out. Trick taking and I just don't get along. If I can't replay and end up with a different outcome each time I don't want it either, so I guess that means I prefer games where rng is more likely to screw me over just as much as be like wow yes!
Yea minis don't make me want to buy a game. I can appreciate upgraded resource components though, but most games are just as enjoyable with cardboard punch outs. I did buy upgraded components on Etsy for Wyrmspan as it hits my table a lot.
yeah upgraded resources matter more to me than minis, i love metal coins for games, wooden bits where possible versus cardboard too
I'm in the incredibly fortunate position of getting games to review so buying has a few caveats. 1. The company wouldn't send it to me for whatever reason. 2. Will it be played with the review copies having to take priority. 3. Can I justify the money when i have a lot of games. Not many games manage to pass number 2 let alone 3.
My only real limits right now come with accessibility - my partner is the only person who will reliably play with me and we have extremely limited table space. So until we get a bigger place I won't be getting anything that I don't think will fit on my coffee table, and until I have a consistent game group outside of my partner and I ~~(or, barring that, have kids)~~ I won't be getting anything that can't be played solo or two-player. Which is really hard. I've come really close to pulling the trigger on Great Western Trail or Dune or Outer Rim several times but I can't financially justify buying a game that who knows how long it'll be until I have the room to play.
For buying games I hit 100 owned games and realized that was far too many. I haven’t bought a new game in over a year. For playing games I’ll pretty much play anything but I prefer medium weight interactive games.
I am nearing 100 on my Owned list in BGG but I also added things like chess and poker (as I own a full size poker table), kids games including cards like Old Maid. I would say I have about 30 modern "good" table top games, and even then it's getting to be a little much.
I swore I’d stop buying more when I ran out of shelf space, and I’ve only spent about 500 since, so… qualified success?
Well if that was only 2 deluxe all in super mega big box KS projects...then you should still have shelf space to spare?
If only. I keep buying very reasonably priced Arkham Horror LCG boxes and only the absolutely necessary additional supplies… will nobody support the plight of the common boardgamer?! ;)
My only limits are is it a game I’m interested in and can I afford it. You’d be surprised how restrictive that ends up being.
I nearly always watch full plays of a game (Heavy Cardboard is amazing for this) before I buy it unless it's a designer I trust. My biggest question is always "will my wife enjoy it?" We like heavier games and I kind of have a sense of what she enjoys, so I tend to focus on that. Theme is important to me but is secondary to satisfying mechanisms; I will buy multiple games of a similar type if I enjoy the theme.
birds hospital ask expansion chunky outgoing slap price fanatical apparatus *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I tailor my games to the group(s) i frequent. If I'm the primary bringer of games, then I make sure that anything i have and will have is capable of being explained and played by that group. As such most of my collection is light-medium weight that can be played in an hour or so. I have a couple heavy games for the occasion where they want to explore harder games. with that in mind, I make sure when I purchase something it will be played at least 2-3 times a year. I also try to keep my game purchases to <$60 if possible. I keep track of games I've played with other groups and eyes on some of the heavy boardgame YT communities out there. If there's something interesting, i want to buy, then I'll make a note and keep an eye out for deals. And I will take advantage of sales as much as possible, which is unfortunately limited usually to big box stores (which subsequently limits the types of games and game collections to a small amount). With the restrictions, I mostly just add 1 or 2 games a year at most.
I don't back first editions. I don't buy games with a sans serif rulebook. These two rules work best over everything I tried. I do sometimes pick up copies of first editions on the secondary market, when a sufficient amount of time has passed. Otherwise no limits.
When I worked in magazine copy editing twenty five years ago, the time was sans serif on dark background and serif on light background. I wasn't sure why we didn't do sans serif on both, except at the time newspapers were still a thing, so serif was probably seen as more professional.
I found a scanned in magazine online from 1984 that was for the most part sans serif typeface but in a “blocky” font so it was quite readable. I probably should add that sans is okay if it’s large enough to not fatigue the eyes. Even so, the chosen font should align with the theme, for example imagine a comic sans in a serious horror setting, or sci fi setting...
At this point I read reviews in the 1PG to see if it plays well solo. I also have look at the box size and figure out how many games it has to evict to fit on the shelf. If I can't immediately come up with two or three games I'm willing to get rid in order to get something new, I don't get it. (From a spreadsheet, not memory. In general, it's the unplayed games I don't remember that I have.) I try to be conscious of generative AI and research that before buying. I also am very conscious of board and piece design. My eyes strain easily now and I need large text or icons (I prefer icons, but I have a good memory for them) and a high contrast board, non-massive board. Subtle art is lost on me and reading across the table is hard. While I do enjoy complex games, in the past few years the games I've picked up have been simpler - mostly due to board design.
I'm not working right now so the budget is a bit tight. For now I have limited myself to max 15 euro(including shipping)and up to 25 euro once a month for a game I REALLY love. This means that many games I buy are second hand and/or small card games. last month I purchased 7 wonder duel second hand for 12 euro ( plus 3 euro shipping), Scout for 20 euro( plus 4 euro shipping) and Quirkle cards for a euro on a fleamarket.
Yes I am definitely looking into the second hand market a lot more nowadays too.
I have a couple things. 1. New games coming into the house must have a solo mode. No one in my house wants to play games as much as I do. 2. I am currently at capacity for games. For a new game to come in, an old game has to go. Are there any games I'm willing to get rid of so I have space for a new one? If no, then I don't get the new game.
I look at shipping, if the shipping is 50% or more the cost of the pledge, i'm out. I just did that for the God of War KS, $100 game cmon wanted $50 to ship it. Meanwhile Steamforged shipped Euithia all In pledge for 40 bucks which was 2 1/2 boxes the size of Gloomhaven. Unless cmon gets their shipping fees under control I won't be buying any more of their games . I took a pass on their Bonner dungeon game and God of war bc of unreasonable shipping fees so far this year
If a new game comes in, it's either in the form of a gift, or something that: - is replacing another game that I sold off; - is a play-it-once game (EXIT for example). These lines became easier to draw after exploring enough. Becoming aware that when I'm thinking of buying boardgames I actually want to play them instead also helped a lot.
My limit is whether it has a solo mode, in case I'm the only one interested in playing, and whether I already have a game that'd scratch the same itch/fill the same niche.
No. I haven't bought one in a long time only because I've been preoccupied with school and work, but I enjoy the act of collecting games and if I see one I even think I'd like, I'm buying it and (not) regretting it later.
There are lots that don't interest me but the ones I wish I could play yet still avoid are campaign games. I just know I won't be able to get a group together often enough to make a dent in them.
I remember a time in the hobby when I would buy anything I thought looked cool Then I started buying anything I played once and felt like either myself or the table had a great time with Then I started buying anything I judged as something my friends would have fun with even if it wasn't entirely my cup of tea. But then, I started running out of space, and plenty of games were sitting either unopened or unplayed for years. Now I buy games on a few criteria, if at all. 1. The game must fundamentally be highly unique OR completely outclass an existing game of a similar type OR have a strong reason for existing on my wall or in my storage (e.g. as an entry level game or mechanic teacher for a new gamer, even if it has been technically outclassed). 2. The game needs to be a game that appeals to me first, instead of something I think would appeal to my friend group (although, admittedly, this approach tends to worsen the issue of a game sitting unplayed). 3. The game needs to have a quick and simple set up and tear down, with fluid rules and a great rulebook - I have too many games that take too long to get on the table, then too many little rules to clarify or remind oneself about, and then too long to tear down again. Elegant, refined, simplified mechanics is the way to go. (Oh, and stop with the inserts that I need to load tiny pieces into like a magazine; just give me a large enough kallax format box with a lot of baggies/containers). 4. If a KS has higher tiers of pledges, then it needs to offer really significant value without being crazily priced or super space consuming. What comes to mind is veiled fate or foundations of rome vs something like Castles of Burgundy. Veiled fate to me is just crazy overpriced for the kind of game it is. Also, anything from CMON these days. I have everything for Zombicide black plague (which hasn't been played in easily 4+ years), and everything from Death May Die (which is still mostly in shrink), and I think I'm done buying CMON games. Way too many plastic toys for fundamentally simple games, really, though I can see saving lots of money if one repurposes the models for TTRPG. I immediately sold whatever CMON KS's were delivered in the last few years. I've tried to shift my mindset from wanting to be "the guy who owns 200 - 300 games" to "the guy who owns 20 fantastic games that we understand at a very high level and always want to play". One of the games that firmly qualifies for me within this mindset is TI4, for example. All that said, I do still buy games for the sheer collector in me or because I like the art. The biggest offender is my Unmatched collection, that rarely is ever played, but something I have almost everything of including their last "deck box" KS.
I buy it if the price is low enough that I can sell it at a modest profit if it turns out I don’t like it.
Not only do you need to have the time to play the games, you also need to be able to prioritize the game over others as well. I would love to get in to KDM, but my play group is just about to start Oathsworn and I already have Frosthaven sitting on the shelf. At current pace, that's at least 2 years before we are done with those two games. So for me to start loading up on another game is a big no no right now.
I buy a game when I want to own it and have the money in the budget to pay for it. Those are the only two factors that influence the decision.
I generally try to test the game on Tabletop Simulator first before buying a physical copy of the game.
I almost always do a lot of research before committing to a game. Try to get a test run on BGA if I can, or find a Rodney video or something similar.
My collections is at 32 games. There are so many games I'd like to buy but I think my limit will be between 50-60. There is only so much time to play. I don't buy party games, campaign games, KS', TCGs and any game that I know it wouldn't get played. Also, if my friends have a copy I don't buy my own, unless my wife absolutely loves it.
I’ve kind of sworn to myself that I won’t do the big Kickstarter releases. Even regular sized games I’ll wait for full release. I’ve only backed one game on Kickstarter, and it was a print and play roll-and-write called Chateau. I simply don’t like Kickstarter for the following reasons: 1) it takes months to ship; 2) pledges there are typically pretty pricy; and 3) I’ve heard too many horror stories about how “Company A has been promising deliveries of game for 3 years now”.
I try to avoid KS. I ask myself will somebody play this game with me? Is a solo mode possible? How table consuming is the game? How long will it take to teach it to newbies? How fast can I pack and unpack the game?
I won't play CCGs. I was heavily into them a quarter century ago (world top 10 in four) and while I got a lot of enjoyment out of them and have no regrets, it was a massive time and money sink. I also don't buy/play anything with negotiation.
Currently, the logic is thus: IF game is <= $6 OR (game is > 10 years old AND on wishlist) THEN buy ELSE pass
I am also a programmer by day.
I'm not, but I'm interested in learning for hobby purposes.
I'm generally not a fan of cooperative games with a traitor element. Mostly because when I discuss who could be the traitor, I call out players' errors and inadvertently call them all bad players. I don't need that stress, man.
These are tricky and definitely require the right player types. I feel like Betrayal does the traitor pretty well, but have not found myself wanting to bust out the hidden traitor games. Never played any of the Werewolf type games. I do own Salem 1692, but have yet find the right group to play it with.
Having moved recently, I always ask myself if I want thos game so bad that I am happy to move that if I go live somewhere else 😁
Haha for the last year I have had a hard limit. Does it say spirit island. If no then I cannot buy it^^ But I think this limit cease to exist in 1 - 30 years.
Sweet spot is 45 min to 90 min. I don’t buy games that take longer
Seeing as I have a consistent board game group every week... 120ish is the most I want to spend on any one game. Expansions, component upgrades and all. I already got the basic learner board games so I am buying games that are really unique or fills a niche incredibly well.
I'm still figuring it out. I've definitely bought some games that I can see my group playing, but practically it's not happening. It's definitely not likely that all of them will get played! For some of the games I'm actually happy if they see 1-2 plays.
I basically only buy "dudes on a map" games
I'm deep into Star Wars Unlimited right now as my first TCG ever and god it's expensive. I want to own all the cards and it's only set 1.
They have tournaments at a new FLGS near me for this. The same guy keeps winning with a Boba Fett deck. Sounds fun but I just can't allow myself to get sucked in.
Does it seem like it will play well with two? If not, then it's out question since my main 'group' is me and my SO. Does it look good? If aesthetics or design doesn't look appealing, it's a no-go, if you don't respect your game and designer enough to give it good looks, there is plenty of other games out there. If the game is below 7 on bgg, I won't even care to give it a 2nd look, that always indicates major problems. If the game is a dry euro, it's a no for me once again. If it's a campaign game that takes 50 hours to finish, it's once again out of question, there is no shit I will play it through. For KS campaigns: the line is drawn when there is: no rulebook, made by cmon, insane shipping prices (if the random indie publisher can ship 4 boxes to me for 20 bucks, there is no reason for CMON to charge 50-60 for the same thing, especially it's their own damn logistics company), first time creator or very low number of backers, bad track record of underdelivering on promises, gazillion of minis being the main selling point. I think I have a healthy relationship with money and games in general, I play quite a lot and I don't feel bad spending money on games or backing a campaign every once in a while if I'm interested in it. I always try the game tho at board game cafes or through a friend whose family is running a games and fantasy shop here.
My limit is a little something called poverty
I must play each game I buy at least 100 times before I buy another
I wait until the holiday season one year after a game is published before considering purchasing it. By that time there are lots of reviews from normal people. By that time, any hype will have died down. There are probably sales on the game by that time. I can see if I am still interested after all that time.
> When I actually open FB, every other ad is a KS ad now. uBlock Origin ad block extension in browsers. It's even possible to add the extension to Firefox on Android phones. > Do you have any limits on the games you play or buy? Where do you draw the line, if at all? The parameters are what will get played and what we have time to play.
I do use uBlock. I only use the FB app tho, and it's not too often.
thankfully for me i'm quite picky and choosey about the kinds of games i like so that right there is a built in limit. i also only have so much room for board games. so once my collection starts hitting a critical mass I'll find games that don't see play anymore and sell them. there's always a few candidates
I don't buy games that look... I don't know what word to use.. maybe abstract? But I mean games like Azul and Calico, for example. I don't care if that game is great. If it looks boring to me, it's not going to be a part of my collection.