Debit card Monoploy

Kiey

http://www.geekologie.com/2006/07/monopoly_replaces_cash_with_vi.php

I'm not sure how I feel about this. On one hand it's kind of a cool idea since it make the game a little more high tech, but on the other hand it's really crappy on my childhood in a way.

Actually, I don't think I like this, mostly because having all your money out in bill form adds to the psychology of the game. It's like playing poker without chips, it ruins a very subtle but important part to the game. Plus it probably takes longer to use the card then it does to count the money out.

Rym

I was going to talk about this on tonight's show. ^_~

My whole life, I used a calculator for my money instead of the paper. I'd debit the proper amounts for what I purchased and withdrew it from the bank if I needed to pay another player. I couldn't imagine anyone wanting to play another way, and it bothered me that I had to wait as a child while my family would all count out and otherwise manipulate their money.

The basic issue, however, is that Monopoly is a terrible game, especially the way most people play it. The fact that it's not only still around but also popular says a lot about American culture...

Apreche

I, for one, absolutely despite paper money in board games. All it does is make the game longer. Every second players spend manipluating paper moneys is a second of fun that is eaten up. Chips and cardboard moneys, like the ones in Puerto Rico, work much better. Chips are a lot easier to manipulate and sort, thus they don't distract from the game at hand. I also agree with Rym that monopoly is a terrible game, and as a kid I always played with a calculator.

Also, when you played Monopoly, what pawn do you use? In the early days I was always the battleship, later in life I switched to the iron.

Phantasos

The only tolerable form of Monopoly I've ever played was on the original Playstation. All the cash-tending was handled automatically by the game so that you could actually interact with the other players instead of wasting so much time doling out paper money and making change. It still doesn't fix the fundamental problems with the game but I think the removal of scraps of paper can't be anything but a good thing.

Kiey

You're right that compared to other board games, it is terrible and overcomplicated, but I think that as a kid it is a good game since it teachs math and money skills to some extent. So it has some useful qualities, but I think that perhaps that if it were a new game today, it probably wouldn't do so well, I mean who makes a game based on Atlantic City?

crowe

Chips are a lot easier to manipulate and sort, thus they don't distract from the game at hand.

I call shenanigans on this; it's only true as long as the chips are well thought out and well designed. Proof by counterexample: Strange New Worlds, a board game from the 70s that I found in my parents' closet and had a ton of fun playing as a kid, even if we never actually followed the rules. My point is that the money in that game was done with chips, all of the same size and all of a similar colour. Denominations were marked in teeny tiny numbers (ie. 6 or 7pt font) that were obscured by "stylistic" lines and blurred from the printing process. We wound up just stealing Monopoly money because it was easier to handle.

I agree that paper money is very often a huge pain, and that well designed chips such as those in Puerto Rico, or those used in good poker sets, are much easier to handle, but they can also be just as bad if not much worse than paper money when done poorly.

Regarding Monopoly itself, the game is pretty bad. As soon as you understand that 6, 7 and 8 are the most common rolls of the dice, you can pretty much stomp the unskilled handily. Where Monopoly shines, and probably part of the reason it's still popular, is because it lets you play out the myth of being a real estate tycoon and playing up the high finance fat cat thing. It's very turn-of-the-century-upper-class.\

I mean who makes a game based on Atlantic City?

Nobody does, hence, Star Wars Monopoly, Nintendo Monopoly, etc.

Apreche

Ok, I'll correct myself. Paper money is usually bad, chip money is usually good. Also, what do you guys think of cardboard cards for money? Some examples are Alhambra and Amun-Re.

Nazhuret

I'd say that cardboard cards are still chips. Not much else to say about that.

And crowe, I think that does not prove anything. Or rather, it proves that if you go out of your way to design crappy chips they will suck.

Within the very concept of chip money is the implied knowledge that they will be easily differentiated from each other and, to a lesser extent, easily physically manipulated.

As for the idea of no physical system of keeping track of resources... Well, I will always prefer to use actual, physical things as opposed to Rym's way of keeping track in his head or on paper. That's just a personal preference though. I like to handle the bits in a game. I like to pick a thing up before I buy it and all of my hobbies (except for console gaming) and my career choices are centered around physical, three dimensional, real world objects.
I simply enjoy handling and creating real world things sprung from concepts as opposed to manipulating the concepts in my head. I'm not going to make too fine a point of it as it could easily be destroyed as an argument (programs are real, concepts can be taken farther in thought, ideas are valuable, etc, etc..).

ClassicBri

I think this thread pretty much summarizes Geek Nights for me:

Q: Is Monopoly better with classic paper money or with the debit card update?
A: Monopoly is a terrible game.

Out of curiosity, what does "Monopoly being popular" have to say about American culture?

Rym

It's a game where the winner is pretty-much determined randomly, yet people believe that it involves a great measure of skill. It's a game almost anyone can win at least a few times regardless of their intellect. The game appears very complicated while actually being almost trivial. Most people play it with house rules that increase the randomness and make it even less of a game. The primary selling point of the modern game are the "mods," which are basically just skins of the original game: nothing more than rehashes.

As for paper money or not, it does not change the game at all from a play or theory point of view. It only affects some players psychologically. It can act as a minor crutch for someone who can't quickly do calculations in their head (or as well a hinderance to players who have poor memories and must recount their funds whenever making a decision), but it has absolutely no effect on the game's underlying mechanics.

TheWhaleShark

I'm more a fan of cubes or somesuch to represent money/points/what have you, especially color-coded ones. It makes it easy to take a very quick stock of how you're doing, and what you need to do.

Nazhuret

For the most part I would agree that it's simply a psychological thing but it could have very real affects on game play depending on what game you are playing.

As you know all games have a level of information the players are privy to. One of these things is the amount of resources (money in this case) a player has available to them. Along with this is the idea of implicit and explicit rules. Usually the idea of resources available as commonly known information or secret is not covered in most game rules. If it is not explicitly stated you can generally figure out (implied rule) whether or not this information is secret. You should play to the "spirit" of the game.

I think that most games imply that if physical resources are to be used then everyone should be able to see exactly how much each player has. Yes, I understand that if someone asks you will tell them and not lie. But this can still affect gameplay. Without the stack of chips in front of you people might forget how much you have or they may even forget to factor in your resources at all when making their decisions. You could make the argument that the person deserves what they get if they can't remember but that's taking a pretty hard ass view and very much goes against the spirit of the game. Not only against that game but against the very idea of playing a game for fun in the first place.

If someone you enjoyed playing with were to ask you to please use the physical money would you refuse?

Couldn't the refusal (not simple preference) to use physical money be seen as a crutch for the reasons above? I would take it to mean as much. It says to me that you are looking for a slight advantage, even if only psychological advantage, over the other players that goes against the spirit of gaming.

To extend the idea, what's the difference between this and keeping track of your pawns, meeples, counters or cards all in your head and not actually placing them on the board? An extreme example to be sure but inherently the same to me.

tuttle88

This would stop my friend beating me at Monopoly, I suck at mental arithmetic, like severely suck and she likes to take advantage of this by cheating and thus I lose. If I didn't have to add I could kick her butt.

Kiey

I think that monopoly sufferes from the same sorta problem as Settlers, where if you have people who know how to play its basically random who wins. In addition to the fact that the games run forever, and it pretty much stops being fun after 2/3 the properties are gone.

Farragar

As for me, i was allways with teh battleship.

La Petit Mort

I think battleships are random and you lose pieces too easily.

crowe

I'm more a fan of cubes or somesuch to represent money/points/what have you, especially color-coded ones. It makes it easy to take a very quick stock of how you're doing, and what you need to do.

YES. I think we should completely retcon our economic system in North America to take advantage of the Cube Paradigm! Forget chameleonic ink, forget holograms; what our monetary system needs is CUBES.

tuttle88

I never played many boardgames as a child. I had no siblings *sniff*, however I was less pathetic than another only child I know who used to play Monopoly against herself.

Cremlian

mean who makes a game based on Atlantic City?

Have you guys ever looked at the history of Altantic City... Altantic City was the place to be back in the day, before it became a haven of drugs and poverty. There was amazing things there once and lots of famous people of the time. Which of course was the time Monopoly was created.

Atlantic City: "You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious.”

Apreche

He doesn't like you. I don't like you either. You just watch yourself. We're wanted men. I have the death sentence on twelve systems.