User Ratings Determine Worst Board Games are Family Favorites

[elvor0]

No surprise. if i am to rate a game ill rate game that requires skill above pure luck game because the challenge required in skill based game will give me better satisfaction. when it comes to family meetings though you likely not playing with board game enthusiasts. in which case, bring out the monopoly, youll have more fun than trying to teach extended family play, say, BattleStar Galltactica board game.

To be fair, I likely would have more fun teaching them to play the BSG board game, even if I failed to do so. Monopoly is fucking naff. After all the properties have been bought and some lucky sod got Mayfair and Park Lane on the first round, the game becomes a boring stalemate based purely on dice rolls because noone wants to trade, the only excitement being when someone does something of their own violition and robs the bank.

 

[Extragorey]

I see no mention of risk or its dozens of variants. I feel left out because that's what my family plays (my favorite is 2210AD).

You should check out Warlight. It's basically Risk, but online, and everyone takes their turns at once so there's not huge wait times.

 

[Queen Michael]

The Game of Life gets poor ratings? Aren't we being metaphorical today...

 

[nodlimax]

I can understand the low rating of Monopoly. The game is so damn predictable. Based on how lucky you are with your roles you can easily have a full set of roads early in the game and buy other roads just to block others from building houses. If this happens you pretty much won the game already. The other players will then circle the drain slowly until they land on your hotels and lose completely.

Yeah btw. recently played Monopoly with my family. 5 times in a row I had to pay the taxes right after getting the income. It didn't end well for me....

 

[Elijah Newton]

This kind of thing drives me nuts but I'm comfortable here so I'm going to vent instead of just closing the window. First, it's fine for BBG to have its review system - it's a means for adults to think about games for adults. And that's great. Nothing I'm about to say is about adults thinking about games for adults.

Except these are not games you play with adults.

The whole purpose of games for kids - especially the very very little kids for whom Candyland, Chutes and Ladders, etc are designed - is different. We're looking at players 3-5 years old, pre-literate but itching to be part of what they see going on around a table. Luck based mechanics make total sense. The entire point is that no decision making process needs to take place.

People who deride this forget how many elements of gameplay are learned, not instinctive. Taking turns. Moving in specific ways along a board. Interpreting symbols. Learning to win and lose without being a dick.

Once kids get this stuff in place and are ready to move on, by all means bin the games. Or let them keep them to play with friends or siblings so they can learn self-governance.



http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2007/06/11/my-latest-assault

 

[medv4380]

The reasons those games are for children happens to be for the same reason no one used the auction system in Monopoly with children. Every child needs to have the opportunity to win in order to have the motivation to play. If you start a kid out with chess and play to win the child will loose every time. With Snakes and Ladders it doesn't matter how skilled you are so everyone has an equal chance to win. Those games are intended to get kids used to playing together in a group, and at that they are pretty good games.

Also, Tic Tac Toe does not place a high value on luck. It's the opposite of luck. The problem is that once you've mastered the basic logic you can never win or lose. Every game ends up becoming scratch, and the appeal is lost. Luck has Zero to do with winning or losing with Tic Tac Toe. It is a child's first logic game.

 

[NuclearKangaroo]

no surprise there, everyone hates Monopoly

im pretty sure atleast 1 war was started by that dumb game

 

[walsfeo]

Most games can have some value, depending on the audience.

Games have been used as tools for as long as games have existed. Some games teach language, others teach color recognition, while some just teach the patience of taking turns and not touching the bits belonging to others. Snakes and Ladders is a game, but was also a Metaphor; the same was originally true about The Landlord's Game (Monopoly).

I can't remember if the TOS prevent me from linking to outside websites or not, but this one is particularly relevant so I'll risk it. We discussed the dozen BGGs lowest rated games back in 2008 in the On Board Games podcast. In that episode we tried to dissect what value the games had and in some cases what the target audience was. http://onboardgames.libsyn.com/obg_019_the_dirty_dozen

What is your favorite classic game? I like Stratego, Mastermind, Black Box, and even have a copy of Risk Legacy on my shelves at home. If I never have to play Monopoly again, it'll be too soon.

 

[Random Fella]

Every board game should be skill based so I can crush every child I face.

 

[Hulyen]

The idea that these are ideal family games because they're the kind kids can understand or the only ones they have a shot of winning are untrue and doing kids a major disservice.

Kids are way quicker than people give them credit for, especially when it's about something that interests them. Even if a simple pure random game is they only thing they can handle, there are MUCH better options than war! Give them Feed the Kitty, Hisss, Spot It!, Suspend Jr or a ton of other options. Haba is a fantastic German game company that makes high quality games for 2 and up that are also fun for the adults. Worried about Dad beating the kid every time? Play a cooperative game, or one that can be played in teams!

Need an icebreaker game or one to bring to an older gathering? Not all good games are hyper-complex and take hours to play. Some of my favorites are ones I can teach in less than 10 minutes to practically anyone and get everyone playing.

 

[Strazdas]

No surprise. if i am to rate a game ill rate game that requires skill above pure luck game because the challenge required in skill based game will give me better satisfaction. when it comes to family meetings though you likely not playing with board game enthusiasts. in which case, bring out the monopoly, youll have more fun than trying to teach extended family play, say, BattleStar Galltactica board game.

To be fair, I likely would have more fun teaching them to play the BSG board game, even if I failed to do so. Monopoly is fucking naff. After all the properties have been bought and some lucky sod got Mayfair and Park Lane on the first round, the game becomes a boring stalemate based purely on dice rolls because noone wants to trade, the only excitement being when someone does something of their own violition and robs the bank.

the problem is, your nongamer "everything fiction is crap" aunt X may not want to be taught to play BSG board game. she knows monopoly though! and when it comes to monopoly vs boringly sitting at the table, ill take monopoly, thanks. I kinda like monopoly though, maybe its because i used to play it a lot with grandpa, so i may be biased here.