Several months ago I had a little bit of an interaction with Board Game Snobs on how it works to rank games. (On a seperate note, I really enjoy listening to the Boardgame Snobs)
Anyway they, on a podcast episode, they were talking about how way too many people rate their games way to high they argued that, on BGG, way too many people are ranking their games a 8,9, or 10. Where, they ask, are the 3s, 4s, or the 5s? Do people even know how to rank games low any more? Perhaps the people are too invested their games and that blinds them to the flaws in their beloved games.
Anyways, some of what they said really resonated with me. It is hard to admit that a game that you feel like you have researched well and spent good money on is a dud. I know that, on BGG specifically, there are way too many people ranking games before ever having played them. Perhaps even before the game is even out.
But, at the same time, much of what they said didn't resonate with me. And, it didn't resonate with me for several reasons.
For myself I find the games I buy and research I think I score higher than many people do. I follow, pretty closely, how BGG quantifies rankings.
So, by that metric I don't think that we need to feel bad about having collections that are mostly 7s and higher. So, I am curious, how do y'all rank your games? Do you think that most people are too easy on games? Do you think that most people are too hard on their games?