Comment by yifanl
14 hours ago
I mean, Brass Birmingham and many other high ranking games would be rather poor choices for pick-up and play game nights with most groups (number 7 is Twilight Imperium, which takes 6 hours on the short end!). Indeed, a lot of them can be played as deeply as Chess or Go.
There's been study over what "biases" the site has, which I personally think is rather uninteresting (what's the use of a global ranking without bias, after all?), but there's a lot more to it than what's easy to learn.
They also have a complexity score, so you can certainly search for 'find me the highest rated game as simple as monopoly'
Yeah, the other category (I mentioned in my footnote-edit) is giant games that you dedicate a large part of a day to. Diplomacy, Twilight Imperium, that stuff. The two ideal gaming-situations for BGG-type gamers are multi-game game nights, and gatherings to play a single round of gigantic games that they can never get their more-normal casual game night enjoyer friends to play with them :-)
Further, you see a lot of "This game has seen tons of play at our table! Maybe 100 times!", not like chess where 100 matches is something someone who's barely even interested in chess may achieve by accident (I bet I've played 200+ matches in my life, and I'm not really that into chess, don't find it as fun as probably most other board games I've played, and remain entirely terrible at it—and I mean it, even chess programs set to stupid-mode so they only look one move ahead get me about half the time, because I reliably blunder badly at least once per match and they catch it every single time). It's just a very different crowd than the dive-very-deep-into-one-game sorts that might rate whichever game they've chosen to do that with as #1 and aren't even really looking around for other games.
There are exceptions in the rankings, that's not absolute, but mid-weight game night games that play something in the 4-8 range, good lighter filler games for game night, and enormous this-is-your-whole-day games, tend to be the ones that do well, assuming they're also, like, actually good for what they are. That's why super-famous games like chess aren't higher than they are (if chess were just invented today I bet it'd struggle to break the top 5,000—"Two stars, some of the variant rules are OK but ultimately if you want an abstract two-player game on a grid, you're better off with GIPF, and the knife-fight tension and wonderful portability of something like Hive just isn't present here, if you want a game with theme but don't really care about it connecting well with play—which this game clearly doesn't—just get Hive. Also they should print the piece layout and move sets on the board, it's hard to remember all that stuff and it's not like that space is used for attractive artwork or anything mechanically-relevant except the grid anyway.")