Spiel des Jahres: How independent is the jury?

Is the “Spiel des Jahres” jury really as independent as it claims? We asked the chair, Harald Schrapers. In the interview, he talks about licensing revenue, promotional events and a dispute within the jury.

---

This interview is a supplement to an approximately hour-and-a-half interview with Harald Schrapers. You can listen to the full conversation in the podcast Boardcast by Frederik Malsy. The interview with Tom Werneck that we refer to can be found under Tom Werneck: “Schaue mit Neugier auf die Arbeit der Jury, nicht mit Groll”.

Independence of the jury

---

In his book “Das moderne Brettspiel”, Tom Werneck writes that it is questionable whether the jury still decides independently of the games industry and retail. Is he right?
No. As a jury, we decide independently. Tom Werneck calls the book a streamlined version of his dissertation without academic ballast, which is already a questionable attitude. But even in his dissertation itself, he provides no evidence for his false claim. I am amazed that the reviewer at the Kunsthochschule Halle did not notice this. We are a critics’ jury and must be able to withstand criticism. Different opinions about our work are legitimate. But the facts must be correct, and they are not in Tom Werneck’s case.

The “Spiel des Jahres” award not only boosts publishers’ sales; the “Spiel des Jahres” association also benefits from it. In 2024, the jury generated over €800,000 in licensing revenue; in 2025, it was just under €750,000. The money flows primarily into three areas: events, funding and the association’s work. (More on this)

You finance your work through licensing revenue. This comes from games that you yourselves award. Doesn’t this create dependencies?
In 2001, there was a major dispute within the jury about this very question: Are games that promise high licensing revenue being given preference? The background to the discussion was the association’s long-term commitments at the time, specifically the financing of the game archive in Marburg. Three members resigned because they believed the majority would prefer popular, high-selling games to secure funding. Today, there are no longer any long-term commitments to third parties.

The jury employs a full-time managing director, a staff member in the office and a person responsible for the website, podcast and social media. In 2024, personnel costs amounted to €179,620. (More on this)

Even without the game archive, you have financial commitments. For example, you have to pay your employees.
We are not worried about being unable to pay our staff. We have substantial reserves and could manage for at least a year without licensing revenue without restricting our work. This financial independence is important. It allows us to award games from smaller publishers that are not as strong in distribution and thus may generate less licensing revenue. Pictures, the Spiel des Jahres 2020, for example, was published by the relatively small PD-Verlag.

Regardless, the probability that we will suddenly generate no revenue at all is practically zero. The Spiel des Jahres always sells well. In addition, our licensing agreements last longer than a year, and older awarded games also generate revenue.

Proximity to publishers and handling of review copies

---

Almost all publishers organise press events. There, they present new releases, serve food, hand out goodie bags and sometimes even pay for hotel accommodation. Jury members also attend such promotional events. Is this proximity a problem?
That is something each person must decide for themselves. In the “Spiel des Jahres” association, the rules are clear: if publishers also invite journalists or bloggers who are not part of the jury, jury members may accept such invitations. We are aware that these are promotional events. However, compared to other industries, such as travel or automotive journalism, the benefits in the board game scene are relatively small.

Jury members receive all review copies free of charge. They do not return these to the publishers. Sometimes – without guaranteeing this in advance – the games are mentioned in articles, videos or podcasts.

Does the jury only consider games that all members receive as free review copies? Are there publishers that do not provide the entire jury with copies?
There may be one or two publishers that generally refrain from doing so. Others do not provide copies for certain games. These are often titles that are on the edge of what we still define as a board game in relation to our target audience. I have great understanding for this. Conversely, smaller and new publishers in particular send us desperate emails asking why not all jury members have requested review copies. This is not necessary for very many games. If five or six members have played a game and no one thinks it is outstanding, the others do not necessarily have to try it out.

What do you do with review copies that you no longer need?
Jury members are not allowed to sell them. Either they are collected, which is difficult given the flood of new releases, or they are donated. In such cases, they go to daycare centres, charitable institutions or board game clubs. My review copies go to the Spielerei der Falken in Düsseldorf.

Are the guidelines for review copies and press events set out in writing?
When I joined the association, I had to sign a thumb-thick stack of bureaucratic rules. Much of it was over-regulated. Instead, we clarify many questions in joint meetings. We ask ourselves: How do we handle potentially problematic issues? Not everything can be clearly regulated in writing in advance.

Nevertheless, there seem to be guidelines. Why don’t you publish them on your website?
Individual relevant points could certainly be additionally included in the answers to frequently asked questions (FAQ) published on our website, if more detailed information about review copies is of interest to many people.

Trained journalists in the jury

---

The jury consists of critics from the German-speaking world. Some members work full-time as journalists: Maren Hoffmann writes for Spiegel, Karsten Grosser for Neue Osnabrücker Zeitung, and Manuel Fritsch is editor-in-chief of IGN Deutschland. Others report on games alongside their main job or in their free time. Johanna France is a games educator, Nico Wagner a teacher, and Harald Schrapers a press officer. Details about all jury members are available on the Spiel-des-Jahres-Homepage.

Tom Werneck also criticises that there are increasingly fewer journalists in the jury.
In Germany, ‘journalist’ is not a protected professional title. Anyone can call themselves one. It’s also not true that there used to be more trained journalists in the jury. Even the first juries, which began their work in the 1970s and 1980s, only had a small number of full-time journalists. Tom Werneck himself was and is not a trained journalist. For me, what matters more than training is whether someone understands cultural journalism. Such people can be just as valuable to the jury as someone who is a trained journalist but works, for example, as a sports or court reporter.

Games critics who work for German-speaking media are appointed to the jury – and have been doing so for so long that their expertise is proven. Jury members look for such people and decide by vote on their admission. You cannot apply yourself.

How do you determine whether a person can competently criticise games?
What matters is how a game is analysed. What words do you find to explain what a game does to people? Does it excite them? Is it a good game? Does it trigger other reactions? All of this must be accurately recognised and described. Depth and creativity are key. Simply recounting the rules is not a well-founded game critique. That’s why the Day of Board Game Criticism is so important. It reminds us that the quality of the critique is what counts.

What medium the criticism appears in doesn’t matter. There’s still a certain snobbery in some places towards blogs, podcasts, video and social media channels. I don’t think that’s justified. There are now jury members who work in these media.

Doesn’t the jury deciding who joins create blind spots?
I don’t see a better solution. This process ensures independence. In France or Italy, the trade fair companies of Cannes and Lucca respectively determine the composition of their juries. I don’t think that’s better. The success of the Spiel des Jahres award shows that our system works well.

Even so, certain voices are missing from the jury, for example from people with a different cultural background.
As well as journalistic expertise, which is essential, diversity in the jury is also important to me. However, that’s not so easy to achieve. Board games have a very white, male history in Germany and Europe. But that shouldn’t be an excuse for not making changes. When I joined the jury in 2017, there was only one woman. Today there are five – still too few, but it shows that change is possible.

Förderprogramm von Spiel des Jahres

---

The Spiel des Jahres association supports projects that aim to strengthen the position of games as a cultural asset in society. In 2024, the association spent €101,319 on this. This makes the jury one of the few relevant funders in this area.

Does your funding also influence how the jury’s history is written?
You could claim that, but it’s not true. We try to be transparent in everything we do – including interviews or research grants. If there’s something to report or research, it should happen.

In the interview with Bernward Thole on the jury’s YouTube channel, the dispute over the Deutsches Spielearchiv goes unmentioned. In the funded book *Brettspielprofis*, alongside former jury members, current jury member Julia Zerlik is also profiled. A funded PhD thesis examines the games landscape since the 1960s and the Spiel des Jahres.
I don’t know why Bernward Thole didn’t mention the dispute or wasn’t asked about it. The interview was an external project over which I had no editorial influence. For the book *Brettspielprofis*, our recommendation was to include the entire current jury and largely exclude former members to avoid the impression of a commissioned work. For the funded PhD theses, there were no content requirements or restrictions regarding the Spiel des Jahres. On the contrary: the people involved had full access to our archives to scientifically assess the history of the “Spiel des Jahres” association.

Is there still a lack of journalistic counterbalance to the jury?
If the jury were a state institution or part of an interest-led organisation like an employers’ association or the German Trade Union Confederation, that would be an important question. But the “Spiel des Jahres” association is a group of independent journalists from different fields. That makes it hard to create a counterbalance, because we often already represent opposing views. Our approach is transparency: we openly show how we work and how differently we evaluate games.

Transparency notice
Frederik Malsy and I, Sebastian Wenzel, are also invited to publishers’ press events. Attending such events has no influence on our reporting. kulturgutspiel.de was indirectly funded by the “Spiel des Jahres” jury. In 2021, the “Spiel des Jahres” association supported the printing of Null Ouvert – Magazin für analoge Spielkultur with €2,600. Spiel des Jahres had no influence on editorial content. More information is available in our Transparenzhinweisen.