Live data from Hacker News

Monopoly was invented to demonstrate the evils of capitalism (2017)

bbc.com

21–30 of 374 posts

Re: Monopoly was invented to demonstrate the evils of capitalism (2017)

#21
post #2

I guess that explains why it's such a terrible game. People put up with it because it was all they had. Now we have other options, fortunately. (I guess this comment could apply to either the boardgame, or to capitalism.)

Monopoly sucks because of using the house rule that Free Parking is a jackpot of money. Not doing property auctions and paying out $400 for landing on Go are lesser reasons for it sucking. Stick to the published rules and the problems mostly to away.

Adding a prize for Free Parking makes the game last longer. Adding more money into the game (in any manner) just serves to lengthen the game.

Re: Monopoly was invented to demonstrate the evils of capitalism (2017)

#22
post #10

Monopoly teaches people a view of economics being a zero-sum game and too many people learn the wrong lessons from it. Real life isn't a zero-sum game.

Depends. If earth overpopulates and there is lack of resources it will be even less than zero sum.

Re: Monopoly was invented to demonstrate the evils of capitalism (2017)

#23
post #5
post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The boardgame can be great fun especially if people follow the rules.

Any boardgame that involves eliminating players from it is a non-starter for me.

Try Acquire instead.

1. All players play to the end.

2. Implicit alliances are setup similar to the stock market. If the "Saxon" company does better, ALL players who own Saxon benefit.

3. Implicit rivalries are setup similar to the stock market. If "Saxon" company is the strongest in the game, the players you have to worry about are the fellow "Saxon" shareholders. Especially the intense fight over who is majority shareholder (and therefore gets the majority bonus at endgame)

4. It is easier to screw opponents over by buying the last share (or holding tiles they need), rather than win the game outright. Implicitly, Acquire relies upon playing well in a social aspect. Generally speaking, scratch the back of weaker players (ex: If a weaker player a minority shareholder in "Worldwide" company, grant them the majority), they might return the favor (ex: the weaker play may make an acquisition play, benefiting all shareholders of "Worldwide". Its better to be minority in "Worldwide" through an acquisition than to be majority in Worldwide but the company doesn't go anywhere).

Note: All companies only have 25 shares. Once the 25 shares are sold, there are no more. You can only purchase 3 shares per turn (maximum, across all companies), meaning the fight for "majority shareholder" is quite intense. You can win vs players with more money by being the first one to buy 13 shares, as an example.

5. You can't sell until a company is acquired. Reaching monopoly status (11-tiles large) means that a company CANNOT be acquired, which means your wealth is now trapped in the monopoly, unable to influence other companies aside from acquiring them. The wealth counts for endgame of course, but small companies grow faster, so its usually better to leave your wealth in the small 1 to 3-tile companies instead. I have lost games because my wealth was trapped in monopolies before, despite being majority shareholder in the largest endgame companies.

------------

Whenever my friends want to play Monopoly, I show them Acquire instead. Its strictly superior. Better tactics, better social interactions, better interactivity for "losing" players (they stay in the game, and often make the final acquisition plays that determine the winner).

"Comeback victories" aren't really a thing, due to the exponential growth of money in acquire. If you fall behind, you fall behind exponentially. But its still nice that everyone still has something to do at the board throughout the game, especially compared to Monopoly. At a minimum, your tiles determine who you can help or hurt, while your shares you own form your rivalries and alliances. You're never "alone" per se, someone else always tries to become at least "minority" shareholder in those other companies with you. So you can rely upon your alliances to advance in the late stages of the game, even if you're behind.

There's still a degree in fun trying to maximize your earnings, even in a losing position IMO.

Re: Monopoly was invented to demonstrate the evils of capitalism (2017)

#25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Monopoly sucks because of using the house rule that Free Parking is a jackpot of money. Not doing property auctions and paying out $400 for landing on Go are lesser reasons for it sucking. Stick to the published rules and the problems mostly to away.

It's still mostly luck (and who-has-the-most-social-capital-to-persuade-the-other-to-let-them-win) based though. There are lot's of much better board games out there.

That’s like saying that poker is mostly luck.

Re: Monopoly was invented to demonstrate the evils of capitalism (2017)

#26
post #4

I love how everyone who wins at monopoly acts like a right arse to the other people and it turns out it was just rolls of the dice that decided if they won... I certainly always feel like I deserve to have won.

> it turns out it was just rolls of the dice

Often that is how things happen in the real world. When people win they look back and attribute it purely to their own hard work. Some act like assholes, too. So at least in that respect it is a good model :-)

Re: Monopoly was invented to demonstrate the evils of capitalism (2017)

#27
post #3
post #2

I guess that explains why it's such a terrible game. People put up with it because it was all they had. Now we have other options, fortunately. (I guess this comment could apply to either the boardgame, or to capitalism.)

The boardgame can be great fun especially if people follow the rules.

I've enjoyed adding more rules, such as the bank adding loans with interest, bank robberies, insurance and organised crime and other things to make it more like a role play game.

Re: Monopoly was invented to demonstrate the evils of capitalism (2017)

#28
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you win, then?

Look up Pandemic or Forbidden Island for examples of cooperative games that put players against the game instead of each other.

Also, bank attack: https://www.johnadams.co.uk/product/bank-attack/

Re: Monopoly was invented to demonstrate the evils of capitalism (2017)

#29
post #4

I love how everyone who wins at monopoly acts like a right arse to the other people and it turns out it was just rolls of the dice that decided if they won... I certainly always feel like I deserve to have won.

As the title implies, the game was designed to be a lot like real life, and it sounds like that from your POV it has succeeded.
Post reply on HN