know-it-all-itis, the Bane of the Internet

I was on BOARDGAMEGEEK, the popular boardgaming information portal, recently, reading reviews about one of my favorite recent acquisitions MEN OF IRON by GMT. Here's what one wag had to say about it:

I really wanted to buy this game ... but I finally choked on the price; I just couldn't justify $65. Maybe if I see it cheaper through an online retailer, but wargames are finally really hitting a point of pain. That's OK; I'd like to see the companies and designers making more money. But it also means I didn't buy this.

(posted by "Chris Farrell")

I certainly don't disagree about the high cost of wargames (or any other kind of game) these days; I've often written on the value of SMALL IS BEAUTIFUL when it comes to wargame publishing concepts and pricing. Yet, I have to wonder-- BGG reviews are a rating system. You go through this exercise to assign a score to a product that other people may or may not be interested in. What is the point of telling me you can't afford something? That's useful to me? The SRP is what it is. That's the ONE element of information that is usually always available and it's the element of information I can readily make decisions on without any other opinions entering into the decision-- I know what I can afford, personally. Looking at some of the "reviews" on BGG I see a lot of "No Rating: I don't own it yet, but let me talk to you about it anyway" reviews, just like the one posted above.

This sort of information is about a useful as mascara on a boarhog. If I had my druthers, the system would require you to actually have PLAYED something you are attempting to criticize. No offense to the poster, personally; his post just made me more aware of the trend. I entirely agree about the pain of buying wargames, I just think that empty non-ratings makes the the BGG rating system somewhat suspect. And I apologize to Mr. Farrell if he thought I was picking on HIM, specifically (he even called me "Dude" in anger! see the comments!).