Games

[Rindis]

I've come across a few entries that startle me here. Even more startling is that they have ISBN entries, when I'd expect a UPC.

I'm not talking about gamebooks like the Dungeon Master's Guide. That is an actual book, and has a place here. I'm talking about things like
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/18...
which is a game module, consisting of a box containing a board, a sheet of counters, a pack of scenarios... oh, and Chapter K of the rules (introductory section).

It's not something that's meant to be read.

And boardgamegeek.com covers the subject very well already.

So I'm wondering what to do with it and a few other similar items that have wandered in because they use ISBN:
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/13... (supplement again)
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/62... (technically a magazine)

[rivka, Librarian Moderator]

These are items that are sold by Amazon, and therefore when certain types of searches are done on Goodreads, they get added an entries here. If they have no reviews (and generally they don't), previous consensus has been that it's ok to delete them. However, the next time someone does the right (wrong? ;) ) kind of search, they will rise again, like zombies.

[Becky]

Additionally, a number of non-book items (DVDs in particular) are assigned ISBNs nowadays. This may be due to the fact that they are being sold by similar retailers, I'm not sure. For whatever reason the publishers of the items are applying for and getting ISBNs.
I find them handy in my real life as a librarian because our catalog is much more receptive to an ISBN than a UPC number.
Does Goodreads use ISSNs at all? (for serial monographs such as travel guides and reference works)

[Freyja]

I used to like RPGs but never played D&D. However I love reading the supplements (eg - http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=...)
as they are a window into the early days of socially interactive gaming and are often quite humorous.

In fact I've probably re-read RPG books (core books and modules) for entertainment and inspiration more than most books I've come across.

[Rindis]

Erik, no question there. Those are books, and can be (and are) read as such. I'm specifically looking at items that cannot be read.

The particular examples I'm giving are a couple supplements to board games, and are therefore more about physical components, and an item that is effectively a magazine. (Which can be read, but really opens up a can of worms I don't want to think about.)

Compare:
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/18...
vs
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/5288

http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/62...
vs
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/19091

[Otis, Chief Architect]

Hey All,

So whenever something we get from Amazon has an ISBN, we assume it must be a book, so we add it to our database. As you pointed out, this not always the case (for some strange reason that eludes me), but generally those items are ignored by most folks here and cause no harm. Unless Amazon improves the data in their API, there is little we can do about them existing here. I would suggest that instead of deleting them (because they will come back), editing the description to note that this isn't a book.

[Freyja]

I guess what I'm saying is that Modules can be read, just as an Audubon Field Guide could be. I agree if it were just maps, dice, etc that it wouldn't be reading material.

[Rindis]

Which is pretty much what Paratrooper (my first example) is. New Worlds I is better as it contains a book that includes new rules and ship descriptions, but much of it is charts, ship displays, and counters.

Captain's Log is a bit odd as it is effectively a journal or magazine in format, it just doesn't have a prescribed publishing schedule, so it doesn't use the normal magazine tracking (whatever that is, I don't remember right now). There's fiction and other articles, which I could rate, but is seems kind of a dangerous precedent to me. I mean, if I rate/review the two issues in the database, why aren't I rating the others, and anyway, at that point, why aren't I rating/reviewing issues of Analog?

It's just something I'd rather avoid right now.