About Board Game Verdict

Hey, welcome to Board Game Verdict!

We're board game fans and we've built this site to showcase games and help you find your next favourite one. We also wanted to highlight all the great reviewers out there who provide valuable insights into board games. For newcomers into the hobby, it can be a bit daunting to navigate the board game ecosystem, so we wanted to provide a tool that aggregates reviews from various sources to help give a sense of which games might be a good fit for you or your gaming group.

We do this by aggregating critic scores and assigning a score to games. We also offer various tools to help you search for games, such as game style, player count, length, complexity, mechanisms, minimum age, designers, artists and publishers. We also curate top lists to help you find a game that fits your needs and also to have fun with the data we collect.

What makes us different?

Other discovery tools exist out there, but we felt like we could use our design expertise to create a simple tool with the aim to be a bit more welcoming towards new board game fans or families. The board game world is continuously expanding and we think a multiplicity of tools is warranted on such a rapidly growing hobby.

Furthermore, unlike other sites that aggregate user reviews, we only aggregate scores from dedicated review outlets. We feel like this reduces known biases that user reviews can bring:

• Self-selection bias: People only rate games they chose to buy (or crowdfund) and play, leading to skewed reviews since you're more likely to rate highly a game you chose.
• Bandwagoning: If a game already has a high aggregated user review, it might influence future perception positively and vice-versa.
• Cult of the new: New releases might get a rush of excited early-adopter ratings, inflating scores. Older games might slowly fade or get re-evaluated more harshly.
• Rating bombing: Users might bomb a game with 1/10 without playing because of publisher controversy, theme objections, or to “correct” perceived overrating.
• Sample size distortion: A niche 2-player game with 200 ratings sitting at 8.2 isn't comparable to a mass-market game with 50,000 ratings at 7.8, but they appear side by side.
• Designer/Publisher loyalty: Fans of a designer pre-rate new releases highly based on reputation, not the game itself.

Professional critics play games they wouldn't choose personally, apply consistent frameworks, and aren't financially invested in the outcome. We feel that basing our verdicts on these reviews gives a clearer picture on the quality of any given game.

How scores work

Every game on Board Game Verdict receives a score we call The Verdict — a weighted average of critic reviews, normalized to a 0–100 scale. This single number represents the critical consensus on a game's quality.

Score normalization

Critics use different scoring systems — some rate out of 10, others use a 5-star scale, and some use descriptive categories like “love it” or “skip it.” We normalize all of these to a common 0–100 scale so they can be compared fairly.

For star-based scales, we use a non-linear conversion that respects the intent behind each rating. A 4 out of 5 stars means “really great” — not just 80%. Our curve reflects how reviewers and readers actually interpret star ratings, rather than applying a simple mathematical conversion.

Weighted averaging

Not all reviews carry equal weight. Each source is assigned a weight that takes into account its reach and audience size — a widely followed YouTube channel or a publication with a large readership will naturally carry more influence than a smaller outlet. The Verdict is calculated as a weighted average across all included reviews.

Awards

Major industry awards — such as the Spiel des Jahres, Kennerspiel des Jahres, As d'Or, and the Golden Geek — are factored into The Verdict. Award wins and nominations are treated as strong positive signals, boosting a game's score to reflect the recognition it has received from industry experts.

Consensus

Based on The Verdict, each game receives a consensus label:

• Positive (70+): Critics broadly agree this is a good game.
• Mixed (50–69): Opinions are divided — some critics love it, others are lukewarm.
• Negative (below 50): Critics generally found significant issues with this game.

Editorial independence

Board Game Verdict has no financial relationship with any board game publisher, designer, or retailer. No one can pay for a higher score, a featured placement in our lists, or the removal of a negative review. Our scores are calculated algorithmically from critic reviews — we don't manually adjust them.

Source selection

We only include reviews from dedicated board game review outlets and critics — not user reviews, forum posts, or unboxing videos. Sources are selected based on the quality and consistency of their reviews. We aim to represent a diverse range of perspectives and reviewer backgrounds. You can see our full list of sources on our Critics page.

Transparency

Every game page shows exactly which reviews contribute to its Verdict, with links to the original reviews. You can always check our work — we believe you should be able to see how a score was reached and form your own opinion.

Advertising

Board Game Verdict displays ads to help cover the costs of running the site. Advertisers have no say in our scores, rankings, editorial choices, or which games are featured. Ad placements are separate from our content and never influence The Verdict.

Affiliate links

We may include affiliate links to retailers. These links also help support the site but have absolutely no influence on scores, rankings, or which games are featured. A game with affiliate links is scored identically to one without.

AI & LLM use

We believe in being upfront about how we use AI. Large language models are used on Board Game Verdict to help generate some of the descriptive text across the site — including game descriptions, review summaries, and descriptions for designers, artists, mechanisms, and other categories. This helps us cover a large catalogue while keeping information consistent and readable.

Not all text on the site is AI-generated. Editorial content — such as top list introductions, short descriptions for new releases, and other curated copy — is written by us.

Importantly, LLMs never produce scores or make editorial decisions. The Verdict is calculated algorithmically from the original critic reviews — AI has no influence on how games are rated or ranked.

No artwork, illustrations, or visual assets on this site have been generated by AI. All design work is human-made.