Our Current Approach to Board Game Reviewers and Content Creators (2022) – Stonemaier Games

Our Current Approach to Board Game Reviewers and Content Creators (2022)

Sending games to reviewers and content creators continues to be a key part of the Stonemaier Games marketing plan. It’s far from the only part, but it remains an important and significant marketing expense. I would estimate that we sent at least 700 free units of Stonemaier products for review in 2021.

Since my original post on this topic two and a half years ago, last January’s update, and the previous January’s update (plus this older–but still important–post), I’ve refined my methods for selecting reviewers, so today I thought I would share my current process. There’s been a lot of talk about the publisher/reviewer relationship over the years, and with this dialogue and my share of personal experiences/mistakes, I’ve continually tried to refine our process.

I don’t consume any reviews for Stonemaier products, as I want all reviewers to know they can say anything they want about our products without feeling like I’m looking over their shoulder (especially since I regularly chat with reviewers in the gaming community about non-Stonemaier games on Instagram, BGG, my YouTube channel, etc). The more impartial reviewers are–and the more impartial Stonemaier is–the better customers can be served by a diverse array of opinions. However, I offer reviewers an open door to talk to me about our games in case there’s something specific they’d like me to learn from their experience.

The only thing I track is whether the reviewers who receive products from us eventually email me to say that they posted substantial content about that product (it’s those reviewers who stay on the list for future review copies). I also add a link for their review to our website at that point.

We can contact reviewers when we have review copies available (this is much more efficient than fielding individual solicitations from 260+ reviewers every few months–if you’re a reviewer on our list, please don’t solicit us, as we’ll always let you know if there’s a review copy available for you), and those whom we contact can self-select as to whether the timing works for them. If you want to review a Stonemaier Games product and you fit the guidelines detailed in this post, just read the following and sign up on the form found below; once you’re on the list, we’ll contact you when we have products available for review. Here’s how we handle the various stages of review copies:

  1. Advance Review Copies: I typically receive 10-12 copies of new products via airmail from my manufacturer, Panda, a few months before we open preorders. I select reviewers for each of them–reviewers who are willing to share their perspectives on the game within a specific period of time, as I want our potential preorder customers to be equipped with an array of unrushed, unbiased opinions. These reviewers have the opportunity to tell me before we ship anything to them if they’re not available to review the product in a timely manner–I always appreciate when they’re transparent about that, as it means they’re not taking away a limited review copy that could go to someone else (and I say that I’m happy to send them a review copy later instead). While I sometimes choose a few well-established reviewers for advance review copies, I try to focus on growing and underrepresented content creators. I provide a date for those reviewers when they can start sharing their primary content about the product (sometimes called an “embargo date”); the reason is that we do not want to rush reviewers–we want them to have ample time to play the game, evaluate it, and compose their thoughts so their reviews can best serve their audience. Without a such a date, reviewers can feel pressure to race to be the first to release their review.
  2. First-Run Review Copies: When our fulfillment centers receive the full ocean-freight shipments, I email the list of 260+ reviewers and content creators who have entered their information on this form (and who have followed the various guidelines noted in this post and summarized whenever I contact them directly) and I ask if they’re interested in reviewing this product. I then randomly select a pre-determined number of reviewers (typically 24-48 people) from this self-selected list to receive review copies. To avoid covering expensive import fees, we may slightly adjust the list if more than a few are outside of the regions of easy fulfillment, but with our 4 fulfillment centers around the world, that doesn’t come up often. All randomly selected reviewers hear from me soon afterwards (before the preorder date); in this way, all reviewers who weren’t selected also know that they won’t be receiving a first-run review copy from us (but they might get one in the future). That way they’re not left waiting, unsure if they’re getting a review copy, and can choose to preorder the product if they really want it just for fun.
  3. Reprints: I don’t want all of the buzz and visibility of our products to only happen at the beginning of their lifespans, so I regularly offer review copies of reprints. For reprints, around once a month I send an email to all reviewers on our list who have either reviewed our games in the past or don’t currently have review copies of our games, and I offer those reviewers a promo code for a 100% discount on either a specific product or pretty much any in-stock product on our webstore (letting the review place the “order” is more efficient for us and ensures that it goes to the reviewer’s current preferred address). We’re more likely to frequently offer a reviewer free copies if they have a decent reach (i.e., more than just a few hundred subscribers) and if they don’t just post to Instagram (more on that later). If a reviewer wants one of our products and is available to talk about it on their blog/channel/podcast, that’s great; if not, they will hear from me with other opportunities in the future.
  4. Newly Discovered Reviewers: Like any gamer, I discover new-to-me reviewers all the time, and if I really like their content or just want to make sure they’re better represented in the hobby (like our BIPOC efforts), I may contact them directly to introduce myself and see if there are any Stonemaier products they’d like to review. In those cases, I typically create the “order” myself.
  5. Damaged Games: Sometimes our customers report that they receive a damaged copy of one of our games (purchased from our webstore). In those cases, I often send them a mailing label to send the ding-and-dent game to a reviewer, and we send the customer a new game. Reviewers don’t need a perfect box, just a playable game.

A few other quick notes about our methods:

  • We Ship to Reviewers the Same Way We Ship to Customers (from within their region): We ship from fulfillment centers in the US, Canada, UK, and Australia. However, if a reviewer is ever charged customs/fees by their courier, we ask that they accept the package and then contact us so we can refund those charges.
  • We Don’t Charge Reviewers for Our Review Products, Nor Do We Pay Reviewers: Creating substantial content takes time, effort, energy, and passion. To enable content creators to feature our products, the very least we can offer is a free copy of the product. Paying reviewers is a complicated subject, and while we don’t do that, I discuss it in this article.
  • I Don’t Read/Watch/Listen to Reviews of Stonemaier Products: I mentioned this earlier, but it’s worth repeating. I highly value constructive criticism, of which I get plenty from playtesters and gamers. But for reviewers, I want to remain entirely unbiased and impartial to their tastes so consumers can get honest opinions from a wide variety of reviewers. I’m human, and I know that if I would hear a reviewer blasting one of our games, as much as I respect their openness, it impacts my willingness to send them review copies in the future. So rather than risking that impartiality, I simply don’t read, watch, or listen to reviews of our products. For that reason, I’ve started to ask advance-copy reviewers to (optionally) send us a one-sentence quote from their review that features a key takeaway for us to use when linking to the review.
  • I Consume a LOT of Review Content (Just Not for Our Games): At this point, I think I subscribe to at least 500 different game-related blogs, podcasts, and YouTube channels. I love hearing other people talk about games, whether they’re individuals or multiple hosts who get along well with each other.
  • A Distaste for Consistent Negativity and References to “Hype”: I truly want reviewers to offer their honest feedback about games (whether their our games or games from other publishers). However, if a reviewer is consistently negative–for example, lists about games they hate or games that disappointed them–or is focused on “the hype,” as in “Does it live up to the hype?” (see this video), I steer away from that content as a viewer (and such reviewers thus drop off my radar as a publisher too). To be clear, I have no problem with negative reviews of a game that a reviewer didn’t enjoy. But if you’re going to spend time making a top 5 or top 10 list, I simply can’t relate to someone who spends that time focusing on games they dislike rather than games they enjoy.
  • Brand-New Reviewers: If you’re excited to start reviewing tabletop games or you’ve only been posting for a few weeks, I highly recommend that you build up a solid base of content and an engaged audience using the games you already have access to before you request that any publisher send free games to you (as a rule of thumb, if you haven’t already created content for many games in your collection, it’s too soon to ask for free products). A mutually respectful and beneficial relationship between a reviewer and a publisher goes both ways. There’s more on this topic here.
  • Permanent discoverability: Reviewers spend invaluable time and effort to play, photograph/film, and compose their thoughts–I believe that their content is worth finding months and years after the original post. So I greatly prefer when a creator’s content is permanently discoverable. Specifically, if you post reviews on Instagram, (a) build up an audience of at least 5000 engaged followers before requesting a free game AND (b) post your reviews somewhere that a search engine can find them long after the day when you first post (like a blog or BoardGameGeek). Conversely, if you post to a blog, podcast, or YouTube channel, a quick post on Instagram tagging @jameystegmaier makes it very easy for me to share the news (though I don’t see every post and thus can’t promise I’ll share ever post–I try my best!). Sidenote about Instagram: A personal pet peeve of mine is when I open an Instagram story and am blasted with music. I don’t want to blast anyone else with music, so it’s very rare that I share posts that have audio.
  • Featured content: If you accept a free review copy, we’re looking for substantial featured content. That is, we’re looking for more than a quick tweet or Instagram post (a series of such posts is more in line with the idea of “featuring” content). Featured content consists of more than a brief discussion among a number of other games and more than just a 1-2 minute standalone video.
  • I Say Yes to Every Interview: No matter the size of your channel, podcast, or blog, if you want to chat with me to post an interview on your platform, I’m happy to join you (and I think you’d be surprised by how many designers, publishers, and artists will do the same). There are a few small caveats to this–for example, you need to have some body of work posted publicly for me to first take a look at–but odds are very high I’ll agree to join you. Read more about this here.
  • I’m a Content Creator Too: I have a YouTube channel where I talk about games (mostly games by other designers/publishers). But I’m not a reviewer. Instead, I primarily focus on mechanisms: When I play a new-to-me game or expansion, I select my favorite mechanism and create a video about it. I also post weekly long-form videos (e.g., top 10s) that usually highlight a specific mechanism. I mention this at least partially because my channel isn’t fancy and because I found a format that works me (and for my viewers). I record every video in a single take using a basic camera and a decent mic; most are completely unedited. 99% of the games I discuss are purchases or games that friends share with me. And I’ve turned off every YouTube ad option I’ve found in settings–I don’t earn a dime from the channel. Basically, there are many ways to approach content creation–your style and methods don’t need to copy what [insert your favorite famous reviewer] does.

We understand that some reviewers receive hundreds of games, and it’s their choice to accept (or not accept) a free review copy from us given these stipulations.

Overall, I’m really grateful for the wide variety of content creators who take the time to share their perspectives with the gaming community. If you’re curious about my favorite content creators, I’ve most likely featured them on one of our annual charity auctions (like these creators in 2021, 2020201920182017201620152014, and 2013).

Below is a list of all reviewers who have given me permission on the form to share their information with you. Over 25% of this list is comprised of women and BIPOC content creators–I’d love to further improve the diversity of this list! All you need to do after reading the above article is fill out the form, then when you accept a free product, please feature content for that product and send me a link.

This list doesn’t auto-update–it’s something I manually update once a year using our private list. In case scrolling within the list below is annoying, a full-page version is here. If you’ve already signed up but you don’t see yourself on the list below, it’s almost certainly because you didn’t follow some of the guidelines noted above or if you didn’t answer “yes” to the question on the form asking if I can share links and general information about your platform on articles like this.

If you’re a publisher, what’s your approach to reviewers and other content creators? If you’re a gamer, how do reviewers impact your decision to buy games, expansions, and other products?

***

If you gain value from the 100 articles Jamey publishes on this blog each year, please consider championing this content!

22 Comments on “Our Current Approach to Board Game Reviewers and Content Creators (2022)

Leave a Comment

If you ask a question about a specific card or ability, please type the exact text in your comment to help facilitate a speedy and precise answer.

Your comment may take a few minutes to publish. Antagonistic, rude, or degrading comments will be removed. Thank you.

  1. […] original post on this topic four and a half years ago, the 2023 update, the 2022 update, the 2021 update, and the 2020 update (plus this older–but still important–post), I’ve […]

  2. […] Our Current Approach to Board Game Reviewers and Content Creators (2022) […]

  3. How do Publishers Present Games on Websites? Wingspan as an Example - Fervent Workshop Games says:

    […] Stonemaier probably only publishes links to reviews that they specifically request. Jamey has commented that he doesn’t even look at the reviews that he links to, in order to reduce the risk of […]

  4. Sorry to necro this post but I found it very relevant to my current pursuits.

    I’m a tiny hobbyist game designer and right now I have some games on Print-On-Demand websites like gamecrafter.

    I’d like to promote my game out there more but I have no idea how to get into touch with content creators that would be willing to do so in exchange for a free copy of the game.

    Do you know of a resource where I can offer this out to fledgling content creators who may be interested in a free product for some publicity?

    Video Game devs have a couple options like distribute() and Keymailer for that offer a unified platform for these kind of transactions, but I don’t know of anything similair for board game designers.

    This is the game I’m wanting to promote at the moment:

    https://www.thegamecrafter.com/games/literumi

    Just let me know if you have any input on this, thanks.

    1. Oh wait, I should’ve read the post in it’s entirety! Doh! I missed the bottom bit completely. I’ll be checking out the spreadsheet, thanks.

  5. […] Reviewers […]

  6. Hey Jamey,

    Might I pick your brain. I’ve noticed you continue to send out review copies of games like Scythe and I’m curious; Do you think there would ever be a limit, like could there ever be too many reviews?

    I mean I could understand sending out review copies for printings in new languages or sending copies to folks who can reach untapped communities. With more and more people trying to find their voice every day though I’m just curious if you ever look at an up and coming reviewer and give yourself pause? I mean do you ever question if a given person’s perspective can add anything new that hasn’t already been said and I mean if we’re talking Scythe, what hasn’t be said? I guess that’s part of the point, we can’t know what hasn’t been said yet because it hasn’t been said yet. Almost philosophical in a sense.

    I initially asked you this on Instagram and you suggested I post it here and so I am. After reading this blog, I can understand a steady stream of reviewers every so often drip feeding interest in your games to the masses can be valuable.

    I can also understand that literally anyone can review your games/products whether you’ve sent it to them or not for review.

    So that gets to my point, do you think there could ever be a point where as a publisher you hit the limit on the value you could gain from sending out review copies for a given game? Maybe that game is just so popular or has such high word of mouth that it would be crazy for newcomers to the hobby to not hear about your games. Even if they don’t know it exists or know to seek out more about it.

    1. Thanks for the opportunity to answer this here, Cole–it’s a great question. Overall, I really appreciate reviewers sharing their perspective with their audience, whether it’s for a new game or a game we released years ago. People enter the gaming hobby all the time, so I think now is always a good time for someone to discover the right game for them. So in general, no, I don’t question someone’s perspective–I welcome it.

      That said, you’ll see in a month or so that this year I started including the following “requirements” in any newsletter to reviewers when I give them an opportunity to sign up for a game (in addition to the other guidelines):

      1. You do not have a review copy or have an incoming review copy from Stonemaier Games.
      2. You are available to feature the product you select in the next few months.
      3. You don’t already have easy access to the product.
      4. If you choose an expansion to review, you already own (or have access to) the core game.

      Among the guidelines (relevant here) is: “Not Just Instagram: We greatly prefer if that content is permanently discoverable —you spend invaluable time creating great content, so if you post on Instagram, also please post it somewhere (e.g., BoardGameGeek) that people can find months and years after the original post.”

      I think this ties to your question, “With more and more people trying to find their voice every day though I’m just curious if you ever look at an up and coming reviewer and give yourself pause?”

      The fact that someone is up and coming doesn’t worry me at all, and I generally trust in good faith that people delineate themselves as either committed content creators vs people who have opinions. That is, I hope that those who ask for free review copies are doing something above and beyond any person who posts their thoughts on social media. In that way, I do look on our reviewer application to see if the person only posts on Instagram and if they just started versus if they’ve shown some level of consistency and commitment to board game journalism (both are questions on our application).

      I trust (and can lose trust for if this is abused) is that people truly do not request free review copies for games they already have easy access to. Wingspan is a particular red flag for that. Like, do you really not have access to playing Wingspan (a game widely available on the tabletop and digitally), or is it just that you want a free copy of a popular game? :)

      We’re fortunate to have access nearly 600 reviewers who have shared their information with us. I’m glad that there are so many perspectives worldwide of committed content creators and reviewers. That quantity also means that if we sense a reviewer is betraying the trust we offer them, there are an abundance of others to take their place.

    1. Marek: This is the first I’ve heard of Keymailer. I’ve never used anything like that–every single content creator on my list is either someone I’ve reached out to directly or someone who has come to our website on their own.

      1. I can’t see entry in the spreadsheet above (I think it’s in the revised edition?). I met Alex (co-designer of Red Rising at Spiel), as well as Christian with an SM t-shirt. I received 97 review copies from 22 publishers I hadn’t worked with previously, I’m still in Germany – the car is full!

        Demoed Pendulum again just before Spiel. Only Pie in the Sky and Red Rising and then I can rank them :)

        1. Simon: As noted in the post: “This list doesn’t auto-update–it’s something I manually update once a year using our private list. In case scrolling within the list below is annoying, a full-page version is here. If you’ve already signed up but you don’t see yourself on the list below, it’s almost certainly because you didn’t follow some of the guidelines noted above or if you didn’t answer “yes” to the question on the form asking if I can share links and general information about your platform on articles like this.”

          As a publisher, if I hear that a reviewer has 97 games that they haven’t yet reviewed, that’s a huge red flag, not a good thing.

          1. Hi Jamey, I couldn’t see a hyperlink for the full list. I only received the games a week ago and have been creating content and demoing since – I’ve posted at least one video a day since our first communication and daily demoing in person since then too :) many publishers repeatedly sent games and North American ones in particular like my European focus :D

            Whilst driving with the games through Belgium today I was thinking what I’ll be prioritising and had tagged 18 games on Instagram, I’ve already arranged and promoted sessions for Starship Captains (CGE), Picture Perfect (Arcane Wonders), Marvel remix (WizKids) and Terracotta Army (Board&Dice).

            I don’t get chased but feel I must aid and promote ASAP.
            Spiel is when I get the biggest haul and publishers know I offer packages to prioritise their items (with playlists and highlights etc).

            Completely get the red flag vibe, I didn’t offer explain however the feedback is important and glad you’re also passionate too about ensuring an ROI is greater/sooner as possible.

            Only three publishers aren’t interested, one thinks they’ll get overlooked (without realising the cross-promotional/discoverability, another is too small and the third said I’m white and make (which still upsets me as a reason), she knows she’ll get results as she’s still others do nothing and their subsidiary keeps asking for me .. I’ve asked to swap out another influencer and she knows my audience is 79% more women proportionately 60:40 men: women.

            Some companies wish the industry was similar to films, with trailers etc, which is where I start to gain traction.

            I have spreadsheets on what I’ll mention, unbox, demo, review, solo playthrough etc and it’s been effective (people are surprised I booked my accommodation for Spiel’23 already – but I like to prepare (maybe it’s the euro gamer in me) :)

  7. […] Stonemaier probably only publishes links to reviews that they specifically request. Jamey has commented that he doesn’t even look at the reviews that he links to, in order to reduce the risk of […]

  8. An Open Letter to New Reviewers of Board Games from a Tiny Publishing Company – Stonemaier Games says:

    […] Reviewers […]

  9. Ooh, keen to appear for 2002 as a daily posted of board game videos (daily since May 2021 and already scheduled into mid April 2022. Presently, I have received 299 review copies and the 300th from Switzerland was confirmed today. Two more arrived from Germany today this morning and seven arrived at a German address I have this week :) I demo on average eight plus hours a day

  10. Hey there, Jamey,

    Logical and sensible approach here, for sure. Makes sense.

    I like your approach/focus on growing underrepresented content creators with your company/game review copies!

    I’m really just starting to get familiar with this market/industry myself; seems this should be the standard (rule vs the exception) for companies nowadays, especially given the diversity of new content creators just starting out daily vs those who now have more established channels, over years of producing/publishing content (definite widening gap/divide between the two).

    …This morning, I filled out/submitted the form; I was on the fence about doing that.

    After filling out/submitting the form, I read your article “An Open Letter to New Reviewers…” (should have done that before submitting the form, I know…).

    I realize now that my request ‘may’ be a little premature, so no worries/issues if it is ultimately denied.

    Although, i imagine that it is also a bit ‘different/unique’ in a sense of what I had written on the form—IF you see opportunity/potential there for my venture/proposal to bring value to your company, I definitely welcome any opportunity to be able to discuss further with you.

    If not, I’m also OK with some ‘tough love’, as well.

    Thanks!

  11. […] [An updated 2022 version of this post is available here.] […]

  12. […] [Check out 2022’s version of this article here.] […]

See All Comments

Discover more from Stonemaier Games

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading