In the various texts around the site, I mention that one of the categories of things I frequently describe as “fine” is board games. There are a few reasons for that.
The primary is that there are too many. Ones that truly delight are few and far between, and when they do, they’re board games. They’re good for a few hours of entertainment at a time. If you play them regularly, like I do, then hundreds, if not thousands of them stack up.
Boardgamegeek.com gives the following guidance for their rating system:

Given that system, I don’t think I’ve ever played a 10. I’m not sure I could even call something a 9 on this scale. “Always want to play” is hard – there are thousands of games. I would be willing to play most of them, but moods change.
Of the games I own, the “best” ones top out at 8. I like them. I’ll suggest them or ask if I should bring them, or if people ask me to bring them, I will do so. I would put John Company: Second Edition at 8, but it’s heavy. The weight isn’t for most crowds, and the subject matter definitely isn’t, either. More accessibly, I might call Kutna Hora an 8. That’s more likely to make it to the table because it’s lighter, and also, everyone I’ve played it with has liked it, too.
7 and 6 are “most” games. Obviously not the actual majority of games, but of the “hobbyist” board games I’ve played and play regularly, “I would play this again” is usually my reaction. (I frequently don’t actually play again, though, because in a friend group that collectively owns thousands of games and continually acquires new ones, there’s always something I’ve never seen before that turns up.) All the classics are probably here; Catan, Carcassone, Power Grid, etc.
Some fall to 5. In my personal ratings on BGG, things like Codaand Hex Hex are 5s. (Interestingly enough, the site-wide ratings for both are closer to 6.)
Below that, games become “bad”. But take a look at the descriptions. 4 is “not good … but could be talked into it on occasion.” Now, I can be talked into a lot of games. I’d put the bad party games here, like Cards Against Humanity. I’d probably also put Munchkin (generally regarded as a very bad game) here, too. I’ll almost never “want” to play it, but if the right people ask (or I’m drunk enough), sure.
3 is “likely won’t play” but “could be convinced” and then closed with just “Bad.” Given that descriptor, I’d probably put Monopoly here (assuming we’re playing rules as written, so it eventually does end). Everyone hates Monopoly. It’s bad. F-tier. But it still rates a 3 out of 10. (That’s not to say a 3 out of 10 is remotely good.)
In my life, I have played exactly one game that I would actually say was “completely annoying” and that I “won’t play this ever again”. In fact, I like to tell people about it, because I had significantly higher expectations for it. It’s Firefly: the Game. We played it less than once. (We didn’t finish it.) And on BGG, the current site-wide rating is… SEVEN POINT FOUR?! The average gamer is usually willing to play this? I will just about always suggest against it. Often when it’s not even brought up.
Anyway, rather than get into specific games, my main point is that, on that scale, where 10 is the platonic ideal of a game; one you always want to play and don’t think that will ever change (meaning you’ll never supersede it with newer, which is hard when dozens, if not hundreds of new games come out yearly), “good” goes down to 7, and “yeah, I guess I would play this sometimes” goes down to THREE.
So yeah, there are too many games. A few are great. Many are good. Some are bad. They’re all fine.