Ok, so objectively speaking, what makes a game good? I'd be very interested to read some details on that.
Likely that will go into the podcast first.
Ah, so I thought I'd missed something, in that there had already been a podcast on this topic.
Now, just for some very concrete examples of why I ask this question:
In your Ennies Lightning session you discussed a game called Aces and Eights. Litterally most details you ever mentioned about this game (with the exception of the 10 minute quick entry section in the book) would make me shy away from the game. It has so many elements that I would consider to make a bad game. Like lookup charts and tables, a ton of random occurances, etc., all of which are tedious in operation and basically might add detail, but detract from any sort of fun gameplay, and don't in any instance make a game good in my eyes. And yet, in your podcast you praised these as good Fiddly Bits.
So, while I think that the basic premise of this post is valid: If you can switch to a better game, you should, it's pretty important to be clear on what you think is a good game, and what other people may think makes up a good game.