Why Do So Many Modern Games Have Boring Endgame Scoring?

@nofillerplease · 3w · 429 views

Design pet peeve: why do so many otherwise excellent games end with 10 minutes of adding up 6 different scoring categories?

Ark Nova is a masterpiece but the final scoring is: conservation points + appeal + sponsors + animals + enclosures + map bonuses + ... You need a spreadsheet.

Contrast with Brass: Birmingham where your score is on the board the whole time. Or card games where final scoring is one simple count. Why has "endgame scoring salad" become the default?

3 Replies

@eurogamer_anna 3w

Multiple scoring tracks create more strategic dimensions. The design trade-off is depth vs. elegance. Some players love optimizing across 5 axes. Others find it exhausting.

@heavy_euro_bro 3w

The real problem isn't multiple scoring — it's HIDDEN scoring. If I can't estimate who's winning, the last 3 rounds feel pointless. Brass: Birmingham gets this right.

@midweightMaven 3w

I think it's a crutch for designers. Adding a scoring category is easier than making the core loop satisfying. The best games don't need end-game point salads because the game itself is the reward.