Re: TEXAS HOLD’EM: Deal Me In!
Posted: 03 January 2026, 03:11
Why? Spend the resources improving the quality of the games you have instead making such a redundant offering.
If you don't think poker is fun, then don't play it. There are plenty of other games to play and enjoy. I like that there are card games here that I can play along with board games to have a variety of table top fun!
I might agree if this was the way BGA works. At least all newer games aren’t developed by BGA people, but by volunteer or freelance developers, the latter being paid not by BGA, but by the publisher. As there is obviously no one willing to pay for developing Texas Hold’em, we can be quite sure that this is the work of a volunteer dev. So nobody really gains anything if this wasn’t on BGA.Lucy Tania wrote: ↑03 January 2026, 03:11 Why? Spend the resources improving the quality of the games you have instead making such a redundant offering.
Yes, but this is why BGA sucks. Owners lean on volunteerism and take 0 responsibility for qualityFDHenneberg wrote: ↑03 January 2026, 07:03I might agree if this was the way BGA works. At least all newer games aren’t developed by BGA people, but by volunteer or freelance developers, the latter being paid not by BGA, but by the publisher. As there is obviously no one willing to pay for developing Texas Hold’em, we can be quite sure that this is the work of a volunteer dev. So nobody really gains anything if this wasn’t on BGA.Lucy Tania wrote: ↑03 January 2026, 03:11 Why? Spend the resources improving the quality of the games you have instead making such a redundant offering.
Regrading comments about gambling: We’ve got Koi Koi and Go Stop on BGA for ages. These look way nicer than poker and at least to me, are way more fun, but it’s classical gambling stuff as well. Bluffing is a part of many board games, as is auctioning.
While I’d never see or word it the way you do, I see that a lot of things aren’t optimal on BGA. Some of them, like releasing a game that apparently (didn’t check that myself) still has several known bugs, can and should be criticized no matter what, but I think everyone should take into account that the general approach with a mix of development paid for by the publishers and development by volunteers is what makes free accounts possible and what keeps fees for premium at a level that I consider an absolute bargain.Lucy Tania wrote: ↑03 January 2026, 18:14
Yes, but this is why BGA sucks. Owners lean on volunteerism and take 0 responsibility for quality
I just read that entire thread. It seems that not only did the dev not know the game well enough to understand why certain requests were essential, but also the same applies to whoever made the decision to move it out of beta.Mathew5000 wrote: ↑03 January 2026, 07:40 Seems like this game spent five years in alpha and beta. It's a poor implementation and as far as I can tell, none of the feedback in the following forum thread was taken into account before bringing this game out of beta: https://boardgamearena.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=34601