DLog
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Whither the reference books
A conversation about reference books overheard in Dave's mindscape.
Devon: Hey Dave, there are some new editions of science dictionaries available, namely Oxford Dictionary of Chemistry, and Biology. Are you going to get them?
Dave: With only 200-300 new entries in each one, I don't think that provides enough value to purchase a newer edition. I bought the current ones in 2006, and they're the 2003/2004 editions, so the contents are reasonably recent. This brings to mind the whole issue of printed reference works in the digital age -- are they still relevant?
Devon: I think that's the Achilles heel with any printed reference works -- not being up to date. You mentioned this issue in talking about buying printed science dictionaries before, that books still have the advantage of being portable, editor reviewed, and at times convenient.
Dave: Those advantages still hold true, although the quality of web information has improved too, and the updated aspects is a strong plus for internet information. This issue is exemplified by another recent quandary. I saw a used and good condition set of Encyclopedia Britannica in a thrift store. It was the 15th edition from 1976. $60 for the 20 volumes of Macropedia plus Propedia, and $40 for the set of 10 volumes of Micropedia.
Devon: At less than $5 per volume, that seems like a great buy, considering a new set costs $1300. That's about 1/13 the price!
Dave: That's right, yet the key drawback that stopped me from buying that impressive shelf anchor piece is that it is more than thirty years old. Furthermore, I could get the Britannica 2008 software for less than half that price. While the historic, biographical and fundamental information is still accurate, science and recent world developments in the last quarter century will be missing.
Devon: I can see why the printed encyclopedia market is in decline. If there was no digital alternative, the thrift store buy would be excellent. But the low-cost software and free internet sources available, spending $1000 or even $100 for a outdated dead-tree version doesn't seem to make sense anymore.
Dave: There were other encyclopedias at the thrift store too, such as World Book, Colliers, and New Book of Knowledge. And also CD encyclopedias such as Grolier's, Compton's, and Encarta from the before 1999. So in a sense all non-internet encyclopedias also face the same problem.
Devon: Hey Dave, there are some new editions of science dictionaries available, namely Oxford Dictionary of Chemistry, and Biology. Are you going to get them?
Dave: With only 200-300 new entries in each one, I don't think that provides enough value to purchase a newer edition. I bought the current ones in 2006, and they're the 2003/2004 editions, so the contents are reasonably recent. This brings to mind the whole issue of printed reference works in the digital age -- are they still relevant?
Devon: I think that's the Achilles heel with any printed reference works -- not being up to date. You mentioned this issue in talking about buying printed science dictionaries before, that books still have the advantage of being portable, editor reviewed, and at times convenient.
Dave: Those advantages still hold true, although the quality of web information has improved too, and the updated aspects is a strong plus for internet information. This issue is exemplified by another recent quandary. I saw a used and good condition set of Encyclopedia Britannica in a thrift store. It was the 15th edition from 1976. $60 for the 20 volumes of Macropedia plus Propedia, and $40 for the set of 10 volumes of Micropedia.
Devon: At less than $5 per volume, that seems like a great buy, considering a new set costs $1300. That's about 1/13 the price!
Dave: That's right, yet the key drawback that stopped me from buying that impressive shelf anchor piece is that it is more than thirty years old. Furthermore, I could get the Britannica 2008 software for less than half that price. While the historic, biographical and fundamental information is still accurate, science and recent world developments in the last quarter century will be missing.
Devon: I can see why the printed encyclopedia market is in decline. If there was no digital alternative, the thrift store buy would be excellent. But the low-cost software and free internet sources available, spending $1000 or even $100 for a outdated dead-tree version doesn't seem to make sense anymore.
Dave: There were other encyclopedias at the thrift store too, such as World Book, Colliers, and New Book of Knowledge. And also CD encyclopedias such as Grolier's, Compton's, and Encarta from the before 1999. So in a sense all non-internet encyclopedias also face the same problem.
Labels: Britannica, dictionary, encyclopedias, reference, science
¶ 11:49 PM
Monday, June 23, 2008
Trivia generation gap
My alter ego Devon noticed something about the categories of questions in subsequent Trivial Pursuit (TP) editions, and had a discussion with me about it.
Devon: The first edition of TP had what I think are more cerebral categories, or at least more academic sounding, such as Geography, Art and Literature. In later editions you have People and Places, and Arts was rolled into Arts and Entertainment. And with more pop culture categories in other editions, I've read that some trivia fans lament this "dumbing down" of the questions.
Dave: I wouldn't used quite harsh a term as dumbing down, but there is definitely a trend in replacing field-specific knowledge questions with generation-based, pop culture questions.
Devon: How do you distinguish between those two types of questions?
Dave: For field-specific knowledge, one can imagine a history buff, a science geek, a well-read bookworm, a well-travelled person, etc. These can be people of any age. They don't have to be working in that field, just have an interest. Through reading anyone can gain field-specific knowledge.
For generation-based knowledge, it is based on what one experienced during a specific time, usually while in the teens to early thirties. For example, the "baby boomers" have more knowledge of the pop culture trivia related to the 1950's and 1960's than say their parents or their children.
Devon: In other words, field-specific knowledge can be had by a larger group of people, and generation knowledge by a smaller group. So why would trivia game makers opt for something that caters to a smaller group?
Dave: It turns out there are much more people who are knowledgable about generation specific trivia than people who are knowledgeable about a wide variety of general trivia. One might say that generation specific trivia is in fact the "general" trivia that everyone knows a lot about, because it was something they grew up with. But field-specific trivia is more specialized, and very few people are good with arts and science and history and sports and entertainment.
Devon: What would be your ideal categories for a field-specific trivia game?
Dave: I would love to have a Science based Trivial Pursuit, with the six categories being Physics, Chemistry, Biology, Mathematics, Technology, and Multiplicity (other branches of science).
Devon: The first edition of TP had what I think are more cerebral categories, or at least more academic sounding, such as Geography, Art and Literature. In later editions you have People and Places, and Arts was rolled into Arts and Entertainment. And with more pop culture categories in other editions, I've read that some trivia fans lament this "dumbing down" of the questions.
Dave: I wouldn't used quite harsh a term as dumbing down, but there is definitely a trend in replacing field-specific knowledge questions with generation-based, pop culture questions.
Devon: How do you distinguish between those two types of questions?
Dave: For field-specific knowledge, one can imagine a history buff, a science geek, a well-read bookworm, a well-travelled person, etc. These can be people of any age. They don't have to be working in that field, just have an interest. Through reading anyone can gain field-specific knowledge.
For generation-based knowledge, it is based on what one experienced during a specific time, usually while in the teens to early thirties. For example, the "baby boomers" have more knowledge of the pop culture trivia related to the 1950's and 1960's than say their parents or their children.
Devon: In other words, field-specific knowledge can be had by a larger group of people, and generation knowledge by a smaller group. So why would trivia game makers opt for something that caters to a smaller group?
Dave: It turns out there are much more people who are knowledgable about generation specific trivia than people who are knowledgeable about a wide variety of general trivia. One might say that generation specific trivia is in fact the "general" trivia that everyone knows a lot about, because it was something they grew up with. But field-specific trivia is more specialized, and very few people are good with arts and science and history and sports and entertainment.
Devon: What would be your ideal categories for a field-specific trivia game?
Dave: I would love to have a Science based Trivial Pursuit, with the six categories being Physics, Chemistry, Biology, Mathematics, Technology, and Multiplicity (other branches of science).
Labels: boardgames, games, trivia, trivial pursuit
¶ 2:54 PM
Friday, June 13, 2008
Statistics on question-based boardgames
Here are some statistics on the question-based board games that I have. Like much trivia, they make for trivial collection and might be of interest to other trivia fans.
| Game | Year | # Questions/ Cards | Genre, Categories |
|---|---|---|---|
| Battle of the Sexes | 1990 | 672/224 | male vs female; 92 "Countdown" couples or movies with 3 hints, 120 "Showdown" categories |
| Beginner's Marathon | 1991 | 2500/600 | general kids |
| Gender Bender | 1988 | 350 | male vs female |
| Gender Gap | 1997 | 620 | male vs female |
| Global Watch | 1991 | 2400/600 | Nature: Environment, Living World, Science and Tech, Geography |
| In Pursuit | 2002 | 2400/400 | general: Who & Where, Pop Culture, Headlines, Science & Tech, Sports & Games, Wild Card |
| Inquizitive | 1984 | 2304 | general: education, history, geography, science, books & music, TV & film, sports, inquizitive |
| IQ 2000 | 2000 | 2000/500 | general kids: General, Storybook, Heroes & Villians, Cartoons & TV, Language Arts, Animals, Games and Sports |
| Jeopardy | 1992 | 2040/204 | general |
| Judge for Yourself | 1999 | 500 | dilemma |
| Mindtrap | 1991 | 512 | brain teasers and lateral thinking |
| National Geographic Global Pursuit | 1987 | 972/324 | Geography: Historic Happenings, People and Places, People and Products, Planet Earth, Wildcard |
| National Geographic Mission: Survival | 1995 | 1000/250 | Nature: Rain Forest, Desert, Mountain, Ocean |
| Newsweek Ultimate Trivia | 1984 | 3000/500 | general: history, geography, biz/eco/math/sci/tech, arts, showbiz, misc |
| Numaro | 2007 | 1800/300 | general, numbers |
| Picture Pursuit | 1994 | 2100/350 | general: People & Places, Art & Entertainment, History, Science & Nature, Sports & Leisure, Wild Card; 208 picture puzzles |
| Professor Noggin's Creatures of Myth and Legend Card Game | 2005 | 180/30 | Mythology; kids games |
| Professor Noggin's Dinosaur Card Game | 2002 | 180/30 | Dinosaurs; kids games |
| Psychologizer | 1990 | 600 | personality: Love & Sex, Philosophy, Current Events, Sports & Recreation, Morality, Personality |
| PunchLines Comedy Game | 1985 | 1600/200 | Comedy tasks: Impersonations, Riddles, One Liners, Limericks, Groaners, Tongue Twisters, Culture Jokes, Story Jokes |
| Scruples | 1984 | 245 | dilemma |
| Scruples 2nd Edition | 1986 | 240 | dilemma |
| Scruples '90s Edition | 1990 | 240 | dilemma |
| Super Quiz | 1982 | 5760/960 | general: sports, history, science, geography, words, movies |
| Super Quiz II | 1983 | 5760/960 | general: mostly music, TV, spelling, famous people, leisure & travel, potluck |
| Table Talk | 1995 | 1200 | food and cooking |
| Trivial Pursuit I | 1983 | 6000/1000 | general: Geography, Entertainment, History, Art & Literature, Science & Nature, Sports & Leisure |
| Trivial Pursuit Genus II | 1984 | 6000/1000 | general: Geography, Entertainment, History, Art & Literature, Science & Nature, Sports & Leisure |
| Trivial Pursuit Genus III | 1994 | 4800/800 | general: People & Places, Art & Entertainment, History, Science & Nature, Sports & Leisure, Wild Card |
| Trivial Pursuit Genus IV | 1997 | 4800/800 | general: People & Places, Art & Entertainment, History, Science & Nature, Sports & Leisure, Wild Card |
| Trivial Pursuit Genus 6 | 2003 | 4800/800 | general: People & Places, Art & Entertainment, History, Science & Nature, Sports & Leisure, Wild Card |
| Trivial Pursuit Baby Boomers | 1983 | 6000/1000 | pop culture: Television, Stage & Screen, Nightly News, Publishing, Lives & Times, RPM (Music) |
| Trivial Pursuit Disney Family Edition | 1985 | 6000/1000 | general kids: Places, Music, People, Fantasy, Science, Leisure |
| Trivial Pursuit Junior 4th Edition | 1996 | 1200/200 | general kids: Stories & Songs, Games, Every Day, Fun, Nature, Science |
| Trivial Pursuit The 1980's | 1989 | 4800/800 | pop culture: Entertainment, In the News, Personalities, Sports & Leisure, That's Life, Wild Card |
| Trivial Pursuit TV Edition | 1991 | 4800/800 | pop culture: Classics, Sitcoms, Drama, Kids & Games, Stars, Wild Card |
| Trivial Pursuit Young People | 1984 | 6000/1000 | general kids: People & Places, Good Times, Science & Tech, Art & Culture, Natural World, Games & Hobbies |
| Urban Myth | 2002 | 1000/700 | pop culture: Celebrity, Health, Classics, Nature, Business, Crime |
| What the F*ck | 2004 | 432 | dilemma |
| Who Wants to be a Millionaire | 2000 | 2000/1000 | general |
| Wit's End | 1999 | 1600/400 | general: Teaser (analogy), Odd One Out, Sequence, Wild Card |
| Yuk Yuk's Comedy Game | 1990 | 512 | comedy: 125 opener cards, 387 closer cards |
Labels: boardgames, games, trivia, trivial pursuit
¶ 3:03 PM
Our inner vulture -- or return to boardgames
I've been buying used board games lately, so my alter ego Devon talked to me about my thoughts and experiences on this current fad.
Devon: I know you like reference books. So what got you interested in trivia board games?
Dave: I was searching for information on a tile-shifting board game called The Amazeing Labyrinth. That lead me to discover the tile-placing board game called Carcassonne, which in turn peaked my curiosity in boardgames in general. I had played board games when I was young, but have not played it as an adult. This new curiosity to revisit something new yet familiar, combined with an interest in reference and trivia information, and the thrill of getting a bargain at a thrift store, lead to the purchase of some used, question-based board games.
Devon: I see from your list of games there several are from the Trivial Pursuit family.
Dave: Having been to only two thrift stores, I can non-scientifically state that the game of Trivial Pursuit is a staple item in thrift stores. I suppose the nature of question-based games lead to their non-replayability after awhile, so its off to find them a new owner. I did notice that the original Trivial Pursuit (Master's Game Genus Edition) tend to have more copies than its many other editions and expansions.
Devon: TP was very popular, but given its popularity, why wouldn't there be more used sequels available?
Dave: My guess is that since trivia fans will collect the games, they won't be giving up their gems easily. Thus it is up to the general public to release their copies. But the non-trivial-buff public probably would have bought only TP, played it and enjoyed it but not so much as to buy more of the same because they only know a minority of the answers and what's the fun in looking like a hermit around the smug know-it-all's. Hmm, come to think of it that's why I didn't get into the Trivial Pursuit craze.
Devon: So why are you buying questions-based games now, given that you actually have little interest or time or trivia comrades in playing them?
Dave: The hunter-gatherer experience encoded in our genes can be expressed, or in modern parlance get dead stuff for less. The essence of questions-based games are in the questions. Through years of blood, sweat and tears the game creators came up with intellectual property that now lie in decrepit boxes and can be had for one dollar.
Devon: That sounds like a sad ending, like the dinosaurs.
Dave: I say that not as a statement of lament, rather as a statement of joy. Those games' journey are not yet over, for they, like used books, have found a new home where their eclectic knowledge can sit side by side with universally recognized tomes such as dictionaries and encyclopedias.
Devon: So your inner vulture is just an admirer.
Devon: I know you like reference books. So what got you interested in trivia board games?
Dave: I was searching for information on a tile-shifting board game called The Amazeing Labyrinth. That lead me to discover the tile-placing board game called Carcassonne, which in turn peaked my curiosity in boardgames in general. I had played board games when I was young, but have not played it as an adult. This new curiosity to revisit something new yet familiar, combined with an interest in reference and trivia information, and the thrill of getting a bargain at a thrift store, lead to the purchase of some used, question-based board games.
Devon: I see from your list of games there several are from the Trivial Pursuit family.
Dave: Having been to only two thrift stores, I can non-scientifically state that the game of Trivial Pursuit is a staple item in thrift stores. I suppose the nature of question-based games lead to their non-replayability after awhile, so its off to find them a new owner. I did notice that the original Trivial Pursuit (Master's Game Genus Edition) tend to have more copies than its many other editions and expansions.
Devon: TP was very popular, but given its popularity, why wouldn't there be more used sequels available?
Dave: My guess is that since trivia fans will collect the games, they won't be giving up their gems easily. Thus it is up to the general public to release their copies. But the non-trivial-buff public probably would have bought only TP, played it and enjoyed it but not so much as to buy more of the same because they only know a minority of the answers and what's the fun in looking like a hermit around the smug know-it-all's. Hmm, come to think of it that's why I didn't get into the Trivial Pursuit craze.
Devon: So why are you buying questions-based games now, given that you actually have little interest or time or trivia comrades in playing them?
Dave: The hunter-gatherer experience encoded in our genes can be expressed, or in modern parlance get dead stuff for less. The essence of questions-based games are in the questions. Through years of blood, sweat and tears the game creators came up with intellectual property that now lie in decrepit boxes and can be had for one dollar.
Devon: That sounds like a sad ending, like the dinosaurs.
Dave: I say that not as a statement of lament, rather as a statement of joy. Those games' journey are not yet over, for they, like used books, have found a new home where their eclectic knowledge can sit side by side with universally recognized tomes such as dictionaries and encyclopedias.
Devon: So your inner vulture is just an admirer.
Labels: boardgames, games, thrift stores, trivia
¶ 2:03 PM
