Shitty board games and Cards Against Humanities Bickering

[schild]

Thats an excellent way to never have to give a firm opinion that may be proven wrong.

As opposed to having insanely firm opinions that are proven wrong as in the exact nanosecond that they are uttered? At the level of antimatter meeting matter and fueling the warp engines of the Enterprise? Not like anyone around here is wrong like that.

You don't get to be vague and non-committal when you literally write a book about fun. Comparing apples to authors here, bruh.

Thats an excellent way to never have to give a firm opinion that may be proven wrong.

Hardly! I've never been accused of lacking opinions (or of not being proven wrong) before.

No, it's just that something like tic-tac-toe or Snakes and Ladders is clarly a good game for its demo, and a bad game outside of it. I'm practical and functionalist about it. Hammers make for poor knives, and all that.

Basically, a bad game is one that is badly constructed for even its intended purpose. There is no shortage of bad games out there.

Being good for 4 year olds doesn't make something magically not be unequivocal shit. It just means 4 year olds have terrible taste, standards, and concepts of fun. "A good game for its demo." Bah.

[eldaec]

I'd agree Snakes and Ladders isn't as bad as the games discussed in this thread.

But seeing some of really well designed stuff my nieces and nephews play (especially anything from Haba) I certainly wouldn't describe S&L as "good for its demo".

Just as everyone seems to have given up making good video games over the last couple of years, board games are suddenly good, even for 4 year olds.

[lamaros]

Being good for 4 year olds doesn't make something magically not be unequivocal shit. It just means 4 year olds have terrible taste, standards, and concepts of fun. "A good game for its demo." Bah.

What?

Seriously, what?

[Yegolev]

I think what is going on here is a "people should like better games" thing, but this argument is dumb even when dealing with adults.

[Paelos]

I think what is going on here is a "people should like better games" thing, but this argument is dumb even when dealing with adults.

I happens a lot with this crowd. The board game nerds get enraged when you say you like a popular board game.

What they never seem to get is that nobody in a regular family of non-geeks is lining up in the holidays to play something random or really strategic. They want to throw dice and have fun.

[Bzalthek]

Pretty much this.  I only get a chance to play these types of board games 2-3 times a year.  Even really bad games can survive a long time with that kind of exposure.

[Teleku]

I think what is going on here is a "people should like better games" thing, but this argument is dumb even when dealing with adults.

I happens a lot with this crowd. The board game nerds get enraged when you say you like a popular board game.

What they never seem to get is that nobody in a regular family of non-geeks is lining up in the holidays to play something random or really strategic. They want to throw dice and have fun.

The only issue with that is that there are a ton of great, simple, board games out there now that the family can just pick up and play easily.  Many of which are far more enjoyable than Monopoly.  But because your grandparents played monopoly, and forced your parents to play it, who then forced you, everybody will continue to play it for tradition sake instead of glancing up and realizing we've been having a board game revolution (across all genres, not just nerdy strategy games) the last decade.  

To many, it's annoying just because nobody is even looking for other shit to play, and insists upon the ancient games of their ancestors, because We Fear Change.

[Ironwood]

All I know is the new version of Mouse Trap is Utter, Utter shite.  It sucks the marrow of the earth and even Elena is disappointed at Santas Choice in the matter.

I really wish there was a good intro to roleplaying boardgame I could get tho, but I've never really seen one that might scratch the itch.

[eldaec]

Mice and Mystics seems to be the stock recommendation for that, though I haven't played it myself.

BGG reckons it works from age 8, manufacturer says age 7.

[Zetor]

How about Aye, Dark Overlord!? Bonus: it also teaches the players the necessary survival skills for a Paranoia campaign. 

[Paelos]

The only issue with that is that there are a ton of great, simple, board games out there now that the family can just pick up and play easily.  Many of which are far more enjoyable than Monopoly.  But because your grandparents played monopoly, and forced your parents to play it, who then forced you, everybody will continue to play it for tradition sake instead of glancing up and realizing we've been having a board game revolution (across all genres, not just nerdy strategy games) the last decade.  

To many, it's annoying just because nobody is even looking for other shit to play, and insists upon the ancient games of their ancestors, because We Fear Change.

You realize how crazy this sounds right? I'm hoping you do.

I mean you just used board game revolution non-ironically.

Plus this falls into the Like What You Like category. I'm happy you like new games. Stop shitting on people for not liking them. We don't want to play what you like.

[Fabricated]

I don't think anyone has ever actually completed a game of monopoly and you can't convince me otherwise.

[schild]

I think what is going on here is a "people should like better games" thing, but this argument is dumb even when dealing with adults.

I happens a lot with this crowd. The board game nerds get enraged when you say you like a popular board game.

What they never seem to get is that nobody in a regular family of non-geeks is lining up in the holidays to play something random or really strategic. They want to throw dice and have fun.

No one is enraged. I'd just rather people play Love Letter, Ticket To Ride, or whatever. it's really not asking too much for people to stop playing trash given the volume of good, fast, easier than rolling dice shit on the market.

[Teleku]

The only issue with that is that there are a ton of great, simple, board games out there now that the family can just pick up and play easily.  Many of which are far more enjoyable than Monopoly.  But because your grandparents played monopoly, and forced your parents to play it, who then forced you, everybody will continue to play it for tradition sake instead of glancing up and realizing we've been having a board game revolution (across all genres, not just nerdy strategy games) the last decade.  

To many, it's annoying just because nobody is even looking for other shit to play, and insists upon the ancient games of their ancestors, because We Fear Change.

You realize how crazy this sounds right? I'm hoping you do.

I mean you just used board game revolution non-ironically.

Plus this falls into the Like What You Like category. I'm happy you like new games. Stop shitting on people for not liking them. We don't want to play what you like.

What Schild said.  There is no 'rage' or anything.  You seem to have taken that post way to personally.  I'm saying its just like watching that old crazy relative who refuses to look up anything on the internet because the yellow pages have always worked just fine.  Or my Mom who is proud to have never used an ATM in her life, and still walks into the bank and waits in line to withdraw money because she's done that all her life.  You just feel sad for them.  You want to help them!  Slide them hints about the quality of life improvements they might get by perhaps trying something new for once.

I don't think anyone has ever actually completed a game of monopoly and you can't convince me otherwise.

My Family is one of those that has played Monopoly forever because every generation did.  I've played a shit ton of games growing up till now with the family.  I can recall one time in the 31 years of my life where we finished a game.

[Paelos]

This is entertainment. Not a life upgrade. The comparisons to phones or technology aren't apt because these are board games.

Wanting to help people understand how to use their ATM because it saves them time is one thing. Wanting to "help" people understand why your version of entertainment is superior isn't helping. That's being a dick.

Which is why I say, it's great that you like things. There's no need to evangelize when people say they like Monopoly like they are lost in the woods heathens.

[Samwise]

The only issue with that is that there are a ton of great, simple, board games out there now that the family can just pick up and play easily.  Many of which are far more enjoyable than Monopoly.  But because your grandparents played monopoly, and forced your parents to play it, who then forced you, everybody will continue to play it for tradition sake instead of glancing up and realizing we've been having a board game revolution (across all genres, not just nerdy strategy games) the last decade.  

To many, it's annoying just because nobody is even looking for other shit to play, and insists upon the ancient games of their ancestors, because We Fear Change.

You realize how crazy this sounds right? I'm hoping you do.

I mean you just used board game revolution non-ironically.

Think "revolution" as in "industrial revolution," not "French revolution".  As in, characterized by huge strides forward in craft and design, not by having people's heads cut off if they disagree with you, which I think is the connotation you're getting.

I mean, it's fine if you want to keep driving a horse and buggy to your mill where you grind your flour by hand every day and insisting that these newfangled steam contraptions are for hipsters, but every now and then your grandchildren are going to try to convince you that this "electricity" thing is pretty cool and I don't think there's any escaping that.

(fake edit: haha, Teleku also used the technology comparison.  Whatever, it's apt.  Grampa.)

[Paelos]

It's not apt. This is entertainment. Not using gunpowder.

[Samwise]

I think you're on the wrong forum to try arguing that there is no such thing as progression in game design.   

Would you argue that, say, WoW was not a stride forward from EQ in terms of design?  I'm not a fan of either, but it seems uncontroversial to me to say that WoW succeeded because it essentially does what EQ does but it does it much better.  When people compare Monopoly to Power Grid they're saying the same thing.

[schild]

It's not apt. This is entertainment. Not using gunpowder.

Actually, it's EXACTLY like that.

[Phildo]

What if I want to drive my horse and buggy to my new-fangled, electric factory?  Can't I have a foot in both worlds if I want to?

I want a horse and buggy, god dammit.

I really just want a pony.

[Trippy]

I don't think anyone has ever actually completed a game of monopoly without cheating and you can't convince me otherwise.

FIFY.

[schild]

I really just want a pony.

That's because you're a bit of a princess.

[Yegolev]

Recent Monopoly games have slightly modified rules to have less math.  Unfortunately it still takes longer than an Indian cricket match to finish.

[Rendakor]

"Finish" is a vague term. When one of the final two players is at an overwhelming disadvantage, the game is finished when the loser's will breaks. As someone who used to play a lot of Monopoly, I can count on one hand the number of games that were close stalemates.

[IainC]

You realize how crazy this sounds right? I'm hoping you do.

I mean you just used board game revolution non-ironically.

Plus this falls into the Like What You Like category. I'm happy you like new games. Stop shitting on people for not liking them. We don't want to play what you like.

Monopoly is an objectively bad game. You can like it if you want to but it fails at game design in a number of very fundamental ways.

You're wrong when you try and characterise this as 'like what I like or be shunned', there are a lot of games out there and you're trying to paint everything that isn't a Parker Brothers game as some kind of arcane, hipster Euro-art game that normal people can't possibly enjoy when in fact the rest of the industry covers pretty much any base you can think of.

Kamisado is an abstract strategy game that takes ten minutes to play, can be explained in four sentences and you'll want another go as soon as you've finished a game.

Epic Spell Wars of the Battle Wizards: Duel at Mt. Skullzfyre is a game that people who like Munchkin would like but it's a billion times more fun than Munchkin while being just as simple

People have already mentioned games like Dixit, Apples to Apples, Power Grid, Metro etc. All of these games are as different from each other as they can be, they are all easy to play even for non-gaming relatives and they are all objectively better games than Monopoly or Munchkin.

All I know is the new version of Mouse Trap is Utter, Utter shite.  It sucks the marrow of the earth and even Elena is disappointed at Santas Choice in the matter.

I really wish there was a good intro to roleplaying boardgame I could get tho, but I've never really seen one that might scratch the itch.

Have you tried some of the Lego boardgames?

[Yegolev]

The LEGO board games are not great, but they are fun to play with if not to play.  If that makes sense.  My son and his friend spent hours assembling some crazy dungeon thing with multiple games, making rules for it and never actually playing it.  Much like my D&D campaigns in high school.

[Goreschach]

You realize how crazy this sounds right? I'm hoping you do.

I mean you just used board game revolution non-ironically.

Plus this falls into the Like What You Like category. I'm happy you like new games. Stop shitting on people for not liking them. We don't want to play what you like.

Monopoly is an objectively bad game. You can like it if you want to but it fails at game design in a number of very fundamental ways.

You're wrong when you try and characterise this as 'like what I like or be shunned', there are a lot of games out there and you're trying to paint everything that isn't a Parker Brothers game as some kind of arcane, hipster Euro-art game that normal people can't possibly enjoy when in fact the rest of the industry covers pretty much any base you can think of.

Kamisado is an abstract strategy game that takes ten minutes to play, can be explained in four sentences and you'll want another go as soon as you've finished a game.

Epic Spell Wars of the Battle Wizards: Duel at Mt. Skullzfyre is a game that people who like Munchkin would like but it's a billion times more fun than Munchkin while being just as simple

People have already mentioned games like Dixit, Apples to Apples, Power Grid, Metro etc. All of these games are as different from each other as they can be, they are all easy to play even for non-gaming relatives and they are all objectively better games than Monopoly or Munchkin.

[citation needed]

[MahrinSkel]

You really want me to dump a few thousand words describing Monopoly's faults, and exactly why they are bad game design? Or just a few dozen lines of technobabble, because Monopoly is such a touchstone of design errors we've given them names?

It's a bad game. Its biggest single fault is that you have to keep playing for a long time after there is no chance of winning, or watching others play after you have been eliminated. By the third lap around the board, all but two players are effectively out of the running. About the only meaningful decision to be made is if the player who is running 3rd decides to hand all his stuff to the 2nd place player. It gives the superficial appearance of complexity, but in fact it is very simple.

--Dave

[Goreschach]

You really want me to dump a few thousand words describing Monopoly's faults, and exactly why they are bad game design?

--Dave

please

[Morat20]

You know, you could replace "boardgames" with "music" in this thread and not really have to change much.

"Why do people like shit music? X is shit music. People who like X have no taste".

It's the same shit, whether it's wine snobs or music snobs or game snobs. And in the end? Doesn't really matter. People will play what they like, even if they like it for all the wrong reasons. Even if it's because they've never TRIED better stuff that'd be awesome and they'd love -- that's just fucking life. I'm sure there's some pretty kick-ass bands out there that would become my one true music love in the world, if I just happened to bump into them.

Monopoly does suck as a game though. If nothing else it is way the hell too long for my tastes.

Munchkin -- I'm okay with, but I play it like once a year and it's more an excuse to bullshit and drink beer. Nobody really gives a fuck about the game. We play different games when we give a crap. :) Munchkin is for when nobody gives a crap and it's more something to do as you talk.

[MahrinSkel]

You really want me to dump a few thousand words describing Monopoly's faults, and exactly why they are bad game design?
--Dave

please

I'm on my tablet and feeling lazy, this guy covers most of it.

--Dave

[lamaros]

At least we can all agree that Cards Against Humanity is a bad design. Its literally Apples To Apples with racism and cruidity inserted so that people who are to dumb to find humor and wit in everyday life can pretend they're Gilbert Gottfried.

Monopoly is pretty shit too, but ignoring the reasons as to why it is so popular as 'oh its just old' is missing a lot of the point. Some people like The Game of Life. They don't look for the same thing in a game as most of us here.

[eldaec]

While I agree that non-hobbiest gamers look for something different to Twilight Struggle or Agricola, this isn't about suggesting your mother try Twilight Imperium, this is about suggesting introducing non-gamers to good family games in place of bad ones that regularly put people off the hobby forever.

Monopoly isn't popular because it is simple or family friendly, because it isn't any of those things.

Games that are *much* simpler and will likely encourage your family to take more interest in gaming include Carcassonne, Ticket to Ride, and Pandemic. If your family genuinely manage to enjoy the extra complexity of monopoly you could kick it up a gear to Puerto Rico, Power Grid and Cosmic Encounter.

I dislike CAH but it isn't (purely) an absurd tradition of brand momentum and antifun in the way monopoly and game of life are.

[lamaros]

You really want me to dump a few thousand words describing Monopoly's faults, and exactly why they are bad game design?
--Dave

please

I'm on my tablet and feeling lazy, this guy covers most of it.

--Dave

I dislike Monopoly and won't willingly play it, however, lets be devil's advocate for those who might play it. Going through his points:

1. It takes too long to play.

It takes up an evening, giving grounding to a social occasion without having to do a bunch of different things, learn new games, or find new activities.

2. It's an elimination game.

Those who aren't doing well and can't win aren''t forced to sit there and can instead concentrate on drinking, chatting, or go do something else. Despite it's length it doesn't hold those who might have switched off hostage.

3. It depends a lot on luck. Without a lot of luck games would nearly always be won by the most skilled players, which is anathema to getting people who aren't good to replay them. The luck gives them a chance and keeps them interested.

4. It's too quick to master.

This means that people don't spend too much time confused by the game, and can instead focus on other things like socializing instead of concentrating on the board and trying to puzzle the game out. It also means those who've played it a lot don't have much of an advantage over new players, which adds to point #3.

5. Little choice.

This cuts down on AP, so the game doesn't get bogged down. It also means you can go and get a drink between turns and come back to the game and make you move without needing a rundown of everything that has happened.

6. Rule ambiguity.

Exists in nearly all games, Monopoly is light on this compared to many others, especially the ones he advocates.

7. This is a stupid complaint.

8. This is also stupid.

9. Still stupid.

10. This guy really needed to find words to fill out the article it seems.

11. This is just silly now. This guy must hate Newton too.

12. Eh I'm done, they guy is just a tool. So what if people don't all want to play a game the same way as him, that doesn't mean they're wrong, they're just not him.

[Ironwood]

Have you tried some of the Lego boardgames?

No, I have not.  I'll take a look.  Any specific recommendations ?