"Interaction" rating should be 2 or even 1

[GrizelBear]

This is basically a solo game that you play with other people, honestly. There's no way it has a 3/5 for interaction. Thoughts?

[Ceaseless]

It's not the most interactive game out there, but you do still have competing resources through the birdfeeder, bird tray, and end of round bonuses, where one player's choices do impact the options another player has. Pink powers and universal effects also come to mind.

[Ze Monstah]

It's not the most interactive game out there, but you do still have competing resources through the birdfeeder, bird tray, and end of round bonuses, where one player's choices do impact the options another player has. Pink powers and universal effects also come to mind.

But 7 Wonders is more interactive (in my opinon) and it has only 2 stars.

[detlefchef11]

This is basically a solo game that you play with other people, honestly. There's no way it has a 3/5 for interaction. Thoughts?

I used to believe that more than I do now. There are a number of ways you can affect or capitalize on your opponent's actions. Sure, it's less so than many other games, but if it's a 3, that may be a bit much.

[Strode]

Yeah, if Wingspan is a 3, then what would be a 1?

It's not the most interactive game out there, but you do still have competing resources through the birdfeeder, bird tray, and end of round bonuses, where one player's choices do impact the options another player has. Pink powers and universal effects also come to mind.

But 7 Wonders is more interactive (in my opinon) and it has only 2 stars.

The ratings are all independent and don't make sense when compared.

Still, if Wingspan is a 3, then what games are 1s? Most "multiplayer solitaire" games have competition for resources. That's a low bar.

EDIT: just noticed Wingspan is rated a 3 for everything, which makes it look like those were the defaults and no one changed them

[detlefchef11]

If you're playing it as a "solo game with other people", you're playing it wrong. You can play defensively and should always be checking your opponent's board(s) to make sure you're making the move that not only helps you but ideally either takes advantage of what they're trying to do or make it harder for them to accomplish it.

And there are often many decisions that you must make that, thinking about your opponent(s) situation has an effect on.

[swilkiway]

The ratings are all independent and don't make sense when compared.

The entire purpose of ratings is for comparison. A rating of 100 means absolutely nothing until you see something else that rates 50 or 150 and can say "okay, the 100-rated thing is comparatively better or worse".

I agree that Wingspan should really be a lower rating on interaction. Terra Mystica is rated a 1 and I think it has more interaction than Wingspan (but I can understand if other people disagree).

[Strode]

The ratings are all independent and don't make sense when compared.

The entire purpose of ratings is for comparison. A rating of 100 means absolutely nothing until you see something else that rates 50 or 150 and can say "okay, the 100-rated thing is comparatively better or worse".

Unless I am mistaken, the ratings are not done by the same people. They are done by the developers and thus aren't consistent and thus less useful.

But I still think the 3s for Wingspan are just defaults.

[cigma]

The ratings are all independent and don't make sense when compared.

The entire purpose of ratings is for comparison. A rating of 100 means absolutely nothing until you see something else that rates 50 or 150 and can say "okay, the 100-rated thing is comparatively better or worse".

Unless I am mistaken, the ratings are not done by the same people. They are done by the developers and thus aren't consistent and thus less useful.

But I still think the 3s for Wingspan are just defaults.

I also think that the Wingspan parameters are just defaults. And, as you said, even if the developer has set the number intentionaly, there is no definition or general agreement what these numbers stand for. You can read more about this in the discussion here: https://boardgamearena.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=30423

[swilkiway]

The ratings are all independent and don't make sense when compared.

The entire purpose of ratings is for comparison. A rating of 100 means absolutely nothing until you see something else that rates 50 or 150 and can say "okay, the 100-rated thing is comparatively better or worse".

Unless I am mistaken, the ratings are not done by the same people. They are done by the developers and thus aren't consistent and thus less useful.

Ah, that's a good point. I stand by what I said concerning ratings generally, but I hadn't considered that in this case, so I agree with you that comparing ratings here is probably not useful (in which case it might be better to not have them at all).