Do games ever come out of Premium?

[tbhp]

I think this hasn't so much to do with Premum. If "nobody wants to play it", that's mainly because - nobody wants to play it!

It's a self reinforcing circle though. If a game is not well known, and among the people who have looked it up only a small number can actually launch a table, then everyone will struggle to find any table and the game will never catch up. In this particular case, the game not being played doesn't really tell you anything about its popularity.

The same goes for a lot of media to be honest. There's many artsy or older movies that could be very popular if simply more people knew about them. But since only hardcore cinephiles bother to look them up, the popularity can never reach the mainstream.

[cigma]

I think this hasn't so much to do with Premum. If "nobody wants to play it", that's mainly because - nobody wants to play it!

It's a self reinforcing circle though. If a game is not well known, and among the people who have looked it up only a small number can actually launch a table, then everyone will struggle to find any table and the game will never catch up.

I was curious why I didn't like Coal Baron back then, so I played through the tutorial. I can confirm that the tutorial is well done—so that's not the reason for the general lack of interest. Along the way, I tweaked the translation a bit

I’ve come to the same conclusion as before: I find the game tedious and boring. Why?
- At first glance, it looks like an economic simulation with engine building. In reality, though, it’s a “pick up, transport, and deliver” type of game.
- The first, second and third round are played exactly the same, there is no development.
- The availability of resources and goals involves a fairly high element of luck.
- There’s also little interaction between players: you don’t block action spaces with your workers (you simply have to use more workers to perform the same action, but you have plenty of them), nor is there, for example, bidding for the most sought-after resources and goals.
- There isn’t much you can do to improve your score, in terms of clever play, besides "use your workers as efficiently as possible" and "try to pick and fulfill goals for majorities".
- The high luck factor is also evident in the Elo ratings of the top players. For Coal Baron, these are 524, 445, and 417 (each of them has played more than 150 games, so they should be considered experienced players). Compare this to Can’t Stop, a clear “push your luck” game: 571, 465, and 451.
- According to BGA, the game lasts an average of 55 minutes, which is quite long for a game of this type.

I'll say it again (with better reasoning this time): If this game isn't played very often, it's mainly because of the game itself. That's a shame, because the designers, Kramer and Kiesling, have otherwise created many great games—both individually and together!

[RazorOz]

It's a self reinforcing circle though. If a game is not well known, and among the people who have looked it up only a small number can actually launch a table, then everyone will struggle to find any table and the game will never catch up. In this particular case, the game not being played doesn't really tell you anything about its popularity.

The same goes for a lot of media to be honest. There's many artsy or older movies that could be very popular if simply more people knew about them. But since only hardcore cinephiles bother to look them up, the popularity can never reach the mainstream.

That's how popularity works though. Popularity doesn't mean best, it means the most people playing or purchasing a product. Popularity will tend to come self-reinforcing either because it comes fashionable to own a particular brand or in the case of board games, you play what others are playing.

[Gislef]

Cigma: I'm trying not to focus on one particular game. However your points are kind of my point.

If Coal Baron is not considered very well, why is it Premium?

I don't doubt some people are unfond of it. And there are reasons for why anything is Premium. It just seems that there should be someone at BGA who looks at a new game, and older ones, and tells the company that making/keeping it Premium is going to not help it on BGA, if not actively hurt it.

Or.. not? In some cases, I don't understand what the goal of Premium is. It seems like the goal is to list as many games on BGA as possible and making it Premium is the price of obtaining it.

Ark Nova and Sushi Go! aren't comparable to Coal Baron and (another one, for instance) Dice Theme Park. It just seems like Premium status should mean something to the BGA users, not just the companies.

Or to put it another way, why should I or anyone pay Premium prices to obtain access to games like Coal Baron and Dice Theme Park?

[SiRan90]

Cigma: I'm trying not to focus on one particular game. However your points are kind of my point.

If Coal Baron is not considered very well, why is it Premium?

I don't doubt some people are unfond of it. And there are reasons for why anything is Premium. It just seems that there should be someone at BGA who looks at a new game, and older ones, and tells the company that making/keeping it Premium is going to not help it on BGA, if not actively hurt it.

Or.. not? In some cases, I don't understand what the goal of Premium is. It seems like the goal is to list as many games on BGA as possible and making it Premium is the price of obtaining it.

Ark Nova and Sushi Go! aren't comparable to Coal Baron and (another one, for instance) Dice Theme Park. It just seems like Premium status should mean something to the BGA users, not just the companies.

Or to put it another way, why should I or anyone pay Premium prices to obtain access to games like Coal Baron and Dice Theme Park?

Publishers (most of the time) make the decision on whether a game is premium or not. They get some revenue based on how many games are played. I'm guessing they would rather get some to little money than no money for their game being on here

[tbhp]

It's a self reinforcing circle though. If a game is not well known, and among the people who have looked it up only a small number can actually launch a table, then everyone will struggle to find any table and the game will never catch up. In this particular case, the game not being played doesn't really tell you anything about its popularity.

The same goes for a lot of media to be honest. There's many artsy or older movies that could be very popular if simply more people knew about them. But since only hardcore cinephiles bother to look them up, the popularity can never reach the mainstream.

That's how popularity works though. Popularity doesn't mean best, it means the most people playing or purchasing a product. Popularity will tend to come self-reinforcing either because it comes fashionable to own a particular brand or in the case of board games, you play what others are playing.

I guess that depends on how you define the term. I'd use "famous" to refer to how many people know about something, while popular would refer to how many people would like something (either by liking it in reality, or in the potential of liking it if they knew about it).

For example, imagine in an alternate universe people had never seen Star Wars (like maybe it's some ancient artifact from the past that has yet to be discovered). It would be weird to say that in this universe Star Wars is not popular, right? If that universe is similar to ours in every other way, It probably would be popular, the popularity just hasn't seen the light of day yet.

[Gislef]

Publishers (most of the time) make the decision on whether a game is premium or not. They get some revenue based on how many games are played. I'm guessing they would rather get some to little money than no money for their game being on here

I'd agree. But what about the site users, ie the customers? It's a symbiotic relationship.

Also, maybe it's just me, but I'd rather buy a physical copy of Dinogenics, which is free on BGA, than Coal Baron, which is Premium. Maybe the former is a better game, maybe not. But what plays into my decision, and a lot of the people I talk to, is how much we play it, by its Premium status on BGA.

Buying the physical game would seem to help the company as well as the customer. And BGA, which presumably gets a share of the money from Premium memberships.

I'm not saying either should be the sole consideration. it just seems like only the company benefit is considered on BGA. I don't know the royalties, or the sales, and I don't want to know the nitty gritty. It's not my business. If it was ever considered, maybe it should be reconsidered.

I tend to think like a businessman. These days I'd think a Premium getting free play for a limited time, a home page promotion, and a physical ordering discount (after so many plays), would be more beneficial to all parties then just slapping Premium on a new game. But I can dream.

And maybe that's been tried in the past and failed. But time passes, and things change. Maybe Dinogenics should be Premium now that more Jurassic Park movies have come out. And there's less coal mining movies, so Coal Baron shouldn't be Premium. It can go both ways.

[Boudica of Celtia]

If Coal Baron is not considered very well, why is it Premium?

why you ask the question here? It's the publisher's decision - you should ask them what their reasons are. Or ask them if maybe they're willing to change it. Here we can only guess what their reason might be.

[Gislef]

If Coal Baron is not considered very well, why is it Premium?

why you ask the question here? It's the publisher's decision - you should ask them what their reasons are. Or ask them if maybe they're willing to change it. Here we can only guess what their reason might be.

Why I ask the question here? BGA is part of that decision, they're centralized, and BGA is here where I am at and they are as well.

It's also partially BGA's decision. Presumably. They make some money from Premium memberships, and the site designers built Premiumness into the site.

Also, essentially the same reasons you posted your question here instead of sending a message privately. It reaches more people, it's easier, It avoids bombarding the recipient with multiple inquiries, etc.

There's lots of reasons why I'm asking the question here.

[ChiefPointThief]

I’ve raised this topic in a previous thread. I don’t think it was more than a yr ago and yet the number of premium games have seem to risen by almost +200 in that timeframe

I had the same thoughts as op. Because I stumbled upon a game that has very few plays but its premium. There are some unpopular games that are stuck in beta that are premium. Yes the publishers make money if the game is premium but if no one is playing then they aren’t making any money at all. I asked devs why do this and like ppl are saying here it is the publishers decision . But these publishers would make more money imo letting their games be free in hopes that more people play them. Better chance of someone buying physical copies which is what they want anyway. Even for other reasons like publicity (more of the community knowing who created it by going to the page) seems more beneficial.

I had a talk with one publisher who I informed that the best business model for their game was to make it free at first to try to attract a bigger player base and then convert it back to premium. They listened and contacted bga so it is possible. I think that some publishers are not fully aware of what is this best route as it pertains to this for their game. What it seems like to me is you want to get as much players to try your game initially and then the number of active players in that community will dwindle overtime. Trying to make it premium and then switching it to free isn’t going to be as effective.