I'll say this up front: The more I play board games the less I care about the theme.
Some background about me: I'm not a Roleplayer, I'm not a storyteller. I like D&D, but I play it for the combat, for the roleplaying (hence why I like 4e > 3.5). I absolutely love reading, mostly Fantasy Novels. I do not read/play games to relax my mind, but because they can offer the highest form of mental stimulation, I prefer to never stop thinking because thinking is fun. I love games that melt my brain, and offer a lot of choices. I tend to be non-emotional about games and prefer a more analytical approach. Generally this leads to me having a tendency towards heavier games.
Theme in games is a tricky thing. On one hand it makes certain games easy to swallow for newcomers, something that is important to a lot of people here and can be very helpful for people who are trying to start their own group or convert their non-board gamer friends. It can also lead to immersion, something that hooks a lot of people and keeps them interested. On the other hand it can also be a crutch to maintain an otherwise less-than-fun game.
I think Betrayal at House on the Hill is an excellent example of both sides of theme. For newcomers, the theme helps them swallow the complexities of the game. To teach the game you can make it very dramatic and exciting. Flipping room tiles can be exciting because, much like exploring a real haunted house, you don't know what is in the next room. The idea of the variable ending is used because we were lured here. It sets a very good mood and allows players to explore their imagination. The Haunt can be extremely tense and exciting which allows for an emotional attachment to the scenario and at least initially, the game as a whole. It's the same reason that so many non-gamers will play Apples to Apples. It's funny and more than not, people like to laugh. (NOTE: Before I get told off that I'm calling these bad games: First, this is my opinion. Second, there is nothing wrong with liking a game primarily because it makes you laugh/cry/experience strong emotions)
On the other side, I also think Betrayal suffers from being, in the long term, just a theme with a weak game pasted on top. It uses it's theme as a crutch and, in my opinion, suffers from an extreme deviation in fun between plays as a result. Even plays of the same Haunt. Once you get an understanding of what tiles appear on what floors exploring the mansion becomes the "boring part" before the Haunt. Unfortunately the Haunts tend to be very one sided and anti-climactic. There are those moments when the game just shines, and the haunt comes around at the perfect time: Enough of the house is explored but not everything you need, objectives are spread out but not too much, all players have reasonable items and nobody is significantly more injured (mentally or physically) than anyone else. However, this is impossible to bring about with any kind of consistency. In my opinion it is a very thematic take on the "Draw this card and do what it says" genre.
So right now this probably doesn't sound a whole lot like talking about theme in games, but more of "Geeze, Betrayal is SUCH an awful game, AM I RIGHT?". I mean, I don't really like Betrayal, but I would never presume to think that means nobody should. It is a useful tool to showcase my feelings of theme and it's role, as I see it, in board games. I liken it to how I feel about story in Video Games. If I had to choose between having the best story in the world or the most fun gameplay in the world, (assuming that they were mutually exclusive, and that the "story" option still had gameplay in it and it was the worst, and the "gameplay" option had the worst story) I would choose the fun gameplay ten times out of ten. The same applies to board games. There are still some thematic games that I really enjoy, and even games whose theme I enjoy. I love Imperial 2030, not because I get to pretend I'm a big-shot investor pulling the strings of various nations around the world, but because the game offers me immense mental stimulation, burns my brain and has many many paths to victory. Lately I've been really into Splotter's catalog as their games offer me almost everything I want in a game: An interesting decision space with a complex game state.
I have to quote a good friend of mine in saying: "One main difference between mechanically sound games and game that I think rely too heavily on theme: Mechanically sound games get more exciting the more you know about them, while games that rely mainly on theme become more boring the more you know about them." For me this is very true, but it's obviously not true for others. I mean, there are a lot of people who have played Betrayal dozens of times and still love every minute of it. Are they wrong in that? Well subjectively, yes they are, but I can't say they shouldn't like the game(s) they like.
So, to end this, do I think theme ruins games? Absolutely not. Look at the example of Imperial 2030. I don't play it because I love feeling like a world-dominating investor who is willing to throw lives away for the sake of my personal profit. I play it because the game offers me exactly what I want out of a boardgame. Do I dislike Betrayal? Yes, because I think it's a mechanically weak game that is trying to hide it's flaws with a story. Do I hate theme or thematic games? No, but I know how much I value it, which is very little.
Just some points:
No, I don't hate when games have a theme
I think some theme can enhance a play experience, but it should not be at the expense of the actual game
I do like fun, I don't play games silently, frowning at the board and get upset when someone talks
I don't hate randomness, I avoid games where randomness is a critical factor limiting the decisions you can make or as the sole determinant of the outcome. I prefer card-based randomness to dice
I rarely refuse to play a game (I'm not like, "UGH, that game is THEMATIC! How DARE you offend me by suggesting it")
Some background about me: I'm not a Roleplayer, I'm not a storyteller. I like D&D, but I play it for the combat, for the roleplaying (hence why I like 4e > 3.5). I absolutely love reading, mostly Fantasy Novels. I do not read/play games to relax my mind, but because they can offer the highest form of mental stimulation, I prefer to never stop thinking because thinking is fun. I love games that melt my brain, and offer a lot of choices. I tend to be non-emotional about games and prefer a more analytical approach. Generally this leads to me having a tendency towards heavier games.
Theme in games is a tricky thing. On one hand it makes certain games easy to swallow for newcomers, something that is important to a lot of people here and can be very helpful for people who are trying to start their own group or convert their non-board gamer friends. It can also lead to immersion, something that hooks a lot of people and keeps them interested. On the other hand it can also be a crutch to maintain an otherwise less-than-fun game.
I think Betrayal at House on the Hill is an excellent example of both sides of theme. For newcomers, the theme helps them swallow the complexities of the game. To teach the game you can make it very dramatic and exciting. Flipping room tiles can be exciting because, much like exploring a real haunted house, you don't know what is in the next room. The idea of the variable ending is used because we were lured here. It sets a very good mood and allows players to explore their imagination. The Haunt can be extremely tense and exciting which allows for an emotional attachment to the scenario and at least initially, the game as a whole. It's the same reason that so many non-gamers will play Apples to Apples. It's funny and more than not, people like to laugh. (NOTE: Before I get told off that I'm calling these bad games: First, this is my opinion. Second, there is nothing wrong with liking a game primarily because it makes you laugh/cry/experience strong emotions)
On the other side, I also think Betrayal suffers from being, in the long term, just a theme with a weak game pasted on top. It uses it's theme as a crutch and, in my opinion, suffers from an extreme deviation in fun between plays as a result. Even plays of the same Haunt. Once you get an understanding of what tiles appear on what floors exploring the mansion becomes the "boring part" before the Haunt. Unfortunately the Haunts tend to be very one sided and anti-climactic. There are those moments when the game just shines, and the haunt comes around at the perfect time: Enough of the house is explored but not everything you need, objectives are spread out but not too much, all players have reasonable items and nobody is significantly more injured (mentally or physically) than anyone else. However, this is impossible to bring about with any kind of consistency. In my opinion it is a very thematic take on the "Draw this card and do what it says" genre.
So right now this probably doesn't sound a whole lot like talking about theme in games, but more of "Geeze, Betrayal is SUCH an awful game, AM I RIGHT?". I mean, I don't really like Betrayal, but I would never presume to think that means nobody should. It is a useful tool to showcase my feelings of theme and it's role, as I see it, in board games. I liken it to how I feel about story in Video Games. If I had to choose between having the best story in the world or the most fun gameplay in the world, (assuming that they were mutually exclusive, and that the "story" option still had gameplay in it and it was the worst, and the "gameplay" option had the worst story) I would choose the fun gameplay ten times out of ten. The same applies to board games. There are still some thematic games that I really enjoy, and even games whose theme I enjoy. I love Imperial 2030, not because I get to pretend I'm a big-shot investor pulling the strings of various nations around the world, but because the game offers me immense mental stimulation, burns my brain and has many many paths to victory. Lately I've been really into Splotter's catalog as their games offer me almost everything I want in a game: An interesting decision space with a complex game state.
I have to quote a good friend of mine in saying: "One main difference between mechanically sound games and game that I think rely too heavily on theme: Mechanically sound games get more exciting the more you know about them, while games that rely mainly on theme become more boring the more you know about them." For me this is very true, but it's obviously not true for others. I mean, there are a lot of people who have played Betrayal dozens of times and still love every minute of it. Are they wrong in that? Well subjectively, yes they are, but I can't say they shouldn't like the game(s) they like.
So, to end this, do I think theme ruins games? Absolutely not. Look at the example of Imperial 2030. I don't play it because I love feeling like a world-dominating investor who is willing to throw lives away for the sake of my personal profit. I play it because the game offers me exactly what I want out of a boardgame. Do I dislike Betrayal? Yes, because I think it's a mechanically weak game that is trying to hide it's flaws with a story. Do I hate theme or thematic games? No, but I know how much I value it, which is very little.
Just some points:
No, I don't hate when games have a theme
I think some theme can enhance a play experience, but it should not be at the expense of the actual game
I do like fun, I don't play games silently, frowning at the board and get upset when someone talks
I don't hate randomness, I avoid games where randomness is a critical factor limiting the decisions you can make or as the sole determinant of the outcome. I prefer card-based randomness to dice
I rarely refuse to play a game (I'm not like, "UGH, that game is THEMATIC! How DARE you offend me by suggesting it")