×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Monopoly Uses Google Maps To Go Live Online

Soulskill posted more than 4 years ago | from the do-pass-go dept.

Classic Games (Games) 81

CWmike writes "Think you're a Monopoly whiz? Remember running the board and shaming your property-less competitors when playing board games on the living room floor? Well, the age-old game of buying property and making your rivals pay big for landing on your Railroad is now going global. The new, free web game will use Google Maps and Street View to make the whole planet the game board. The online version of Monopoly is set to launch on Wednesday."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

81 comments

Monopoly? (3, Funny)

nacturation (646836) | more than 4 years ago | (#29362197)

I bet Microsoft is the most expensive square.

Re:Monopoly? (1)

martas (1439879) | more than 4 years ago | (#29362295)

whatever you do, don't roll the dice and get to Infinite Loop [wikipedia.org], or Steve Jobs will never let you out again. There is no escape once Apple sucks you in!

Way to triple score the headline! (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29362679)

"Google", "Live", and "Monopoly" all together in the same sentence, even though the story has nothing to do with any actual monopoly, nor is it about the business practices of Microsoft or Google. Weird stuff.

not a fan (-1, Flamebait)

Sir_Lewk (967686) | more than 4 years ago | (#29362267)

I always hated monopoly, and find it incredibly boring to play. Then again my gameplay style isn't that complex: roll the die, move my piece, buy the square, or pay someone money if it was already taken.

I've actually taken to just telling people to "play for me" using those simple rules.

Re:not a fan (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29362313)

Wow! Thanks for sharing that- one of the most insightful slashdot posts I've ever read!

Do you have any more incredibly interesting stories from your childhood to tell us? Something about the way your dog barked differently from all the other kids dogs? Or that hilarious story about kiss chasey?

Re:not a fan (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29362363)

The real trick in Monopoly comes down to rapidly estimating the values of various holdings and making disproportionally beneficial side-deals. The game mechanism by itself is boring, but if you can get a group that's interested in doing early swaps (instead of just hoarding everything until they go broke), there's some fun to be had. To put it another way, poker is a boring game when you take betting out of the equation.

Re:not a fan (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29362527)

Essentially, everyone else knows Monopoly is boring, so they might be encouraged to make some rather dumb trades just to liven up the game and get it over with.

Cutting down the amount of staring cash at least gets it over with quicker.

Re:not a fan (1)

daveime (1253762) | more than 4 years ago | (#29362531)

No the *real* trick in Monopoly was buying Park Lane and Mayfair as quickly as possible. You'd get them every time right before "Go", and if not, they'd land on the most expensive tax square instead.

Re:not a fan (5, Funny)

RuBLed (995686) | more than 4 years ago | (#29362421)

Ah yes the memories, back then I usually topple / add buildings when nobody is looking but nowadays I would argue that since I own most of the commercial places, I am too big to fail so I would receive a bailout package.

Re:not a fan (1)

natehoy (1608657) | more than 4 years ago | (#29364895)

No mod points, but I'd be torn between "Funny" and "Insightful" on that one. Only because there's no option for "Sad because it's true".

Re:not a fan (1)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | more than 4 years ago | (#29362427)

The point of this isn't about the game itself, but rather something that most people know. It's all about brand recognition and sales. Question: do you know how many of the Monopoly sets that are sold are actually played? Answer: who the hell cares? So what if the game mechanics are broken and the winner random. Stunts like this keep the Monopoly name out there, and result in people buying Monopoly sets in stores. They're not too expensive, come in all sorts of customized variants (even for China), and make a craptacular present. If the game sucks, it still doesn't matter because it has fulfilled its function as a gift.

PS you're a dickhead for walking away from a game and saying "play for me". You're supposed to make deals with the other players in Monopoly, that is its only saving grace as a game. I hate game quitters with all my heart.

Re:not a fan (4, Informative)

R4nneko (1194727) | more than 4 years ago | (#29362537)

I don't know, I've never actually played Monopoly with the full rules as written [mospaw.com]. That is to say I've never played with the rule which requires that a property goes up for auction if not purchased.

It seems to me that that would speed up the game and greatly increase the amount of strategy available to a player (Do you think you can let it go for auction and get the property at a lower price, do you think you can drive up the bidding to increase the amount of money your opponents use, do you want to bid on that property someone else let slip).

Quite frankly I didn't find out that that rule even existed until a couple of years ago, and I haven't played monopoly in about 6 or 7 years.

Re:not a fan (1)

Inda (580031) | more than 4 years ago | (#29363531)

I sometimes play on sites like Pogo (normally when visting my mother's house). You can complete a game with 4 players in about 20 minutes, if you have the auctioning features turned on and people actually throw the dice within 5 seconds of their turn starting. It beats the living shit out of 3 hour games with a board on the floor.

Re:not a fan (3, Informative)

anagama (611277) | more than 4 years ago | (#29362621)

I always hated monopoly, and find it incredibly boring to play.

You never learned to play properly. First, it is about business, i.e., anything you can cheat without getting caught is legal. I must say, the sweetest $6 to be made in the game is when a person lands on a property he/she already owns, and I convince them to pay __me__ the rental value. That is pure joy but very hard. First, you have to be dead serious and matter-of-fact when asking for the money, and secondly, you have to hold your laughter till the game ends when the owner of the property pays rent. Part two is actually the more difficult part. To be really successful, you must not even reveal your dastardly deed at all because then that person is forever on guard against your tactics. That is the hardest part of all.

So you see, Monopoly game play can be quite nuanced. Unless you play a digital version and are forced to play fair. Then it is boring as sin ... er, boring as goodness. Sin is way fun.

Brilliant! (1)

TFer_Atvar (857303) | more than 4 years ago | (#29363713)

I was never able to withhold my laughter ... I always told the person right after they forked the money over, just so I could see the expression on their face. Then would follow the inevitable argument about how that isn't fair, and the third (and fourth) people would chime in and say that since the deal was over, the money was lost. Good times.

Re:not a fan (2, Funny)

sa1lnr (669048) | more than 4 years ago | (#29365959)

I haven't played Monopoly since my whole family refused to play it with me. I seem to remember the term "ruthless bastard" was involved in the explanation.

Re:not a fan (2, Funny)

The Archon V2.0 (782634) | more than 4 years ago | (#29368363)

I always hated monopoly, and find it incredibly boring to play.

You never learned to play properly. First, it is about business, i.e., anything you can cheat without getting caught is legal.

And chess is about war, but people are still surprised when I bury an axe in my opponent's skull.

Re:not a fan (0, Troll)

Jason1729 (561790) | more than 4 years ago | (#29363927)

Yet people in America think Monopoly is the ultimate board game. But deep down they know you're right, so they hate board games -- if monopoly is so boring, all board games must be boring. It's a shame because sitting down around a good game is a great social activity which is almost unheard of in the US. The US board game companies would rather sell another copy of Monopoly than something good...I guess that's typical of American business so somehow appropriate.

Re:not a fan (1)

zippthorne (748122) | more than 4 years ago | (#29364777)

To be fair, it's a lot less restricting than some other board games. "Life" for instance. Or the embarrassment of "sorry." There is a strategy element. Also, games take a lot less time if you play by the official rules. The popular "free parking" free-money deal has been examined in simulations and the games aren't even guaranteed to end if you do that.

But all the "good" board games take even longer to play than monopoly. Up to the "ultimate" (notwithistanding the classics like chess, go, mahjong, etc.) of diplomacy, which has been known to end friendships.

Re:not a fan (0, Offtopic)

Jason1729 (561790) | more than 4 years ago | (#29366215)

The "good" board games tend to take under an hour to play, and where Monopoly lags for about 2 hours after the winner is a foregone conclusion, the "good" games come to a sudden end just as it becomes clear who will win.

By "good" game, take a look at classics like Catan, Carcassonne and Puerto Rico (which are all about the same complexity as Monopoly yet have a lot more strategy involved than luck) or less well known ones like Power Grid, and Ticket to Ride.

If you want a light little party game with lots of social interaction and bartering, take a look at Bohnaza. And if you like rolling dice, Formula De is hard to beat.

Bright out Monopoly if you want to spoil an evening.

Re:not a fan (1)

zippthorne (748122) | more than 4 years ago | (#29369863)

Monopoly should only take about a half an hour if you play by the rules. It's "house rules" that bring it up to two or more hours. People make up extra rules to make the game last longer and then complain that it takes too long?

Re:not a fan (1)

Sir_Lewk (967686) | more than 4 years ago | (#29367887)

A good boardgame to me is a game like Risk. The cheating, dealing, and backstabbing involved in that game make Monopoly look like "Go Fish".

You know a game is good when 5 hours through, like clockwork, someone always flips the board into the air and swears it off forever. ;)

Re:not a fan (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29380217)

And Diplomacy makes Risk seem like Slapjack. That doesn't mean that sometimes you don't want to just play "go fish" and veg out for a while, ever.

War (1)

Tubal-Cain (1289912) | more than 4 years ago | (#29362359)

I'm pretty sure Pensyvania Avenue, Route 66, the Golden Gate bridge, and other famous thoroughfares will be very heavily contested.

Crowd sourcing (1)

jamesswift (1184223) | more than 4 years ago | (#29362419)

This appears to be an excellent use of crowd sourcing by Google to get the whole world modeled in 3d.

Re:Crowd sourcing (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29362471)

This appears to be an excellent use of crowd sourcing by Google to get the whole world modeled in 3d.

Cue penis-monster buildings in 3..2...1...

But where's go? ...and my $200? (2, Interesting)

sitarlo (792966) | more than 4 years ago | (#29362453)

Actually this looks like a nifty way to get people into Sketchup design and such. I hope it is a success.

Re:But where's go? ...and my $200? (1)

macshit (157376) | more than 4 years ago | (#29363285)

Actually this looks like a nifty way to get people into Sketchup design and such. I hope it is a success.

I dunno, the whole sketchup thing seems a bit dodgy. From what I can see, they get people to donate models to them, but seem to be trying hard to keep the model format proprietary (by "they" I guess it's the company who originally made it, which google bought). I couldn't find any freely available (non-NDA) documentation on the format, and while they make an SDK available, it's not FOSS [and is written in Ruby, which is probably not what most people want to use].

Personally, while I love the idea of an active community of people creating models, I also don't want to spend any effort making models for free if they end up only being usable by proprietary software!

Maybe I missed something, and there is freely available documentation, or a FOSS library for reading sketchup models; if anyone knows of anything, please respond!

Does that mean I get to own my entire block? (1)

WarJolt (990309) | more than 4 years ago | (#29362515)

I'm not sure my neighbors will be very happy. It seems like a nice way to piss of some real life property owners.

One Of The World's Dullest Games (0)

GrahamCox (741991) | more than 4 years ago | (#29362523)

A truly awful, dull game. I wonder if this will be any more interesting?

Re:One Of The World's Dullest Games (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29369465)

Acutally online monopoly can be fun - the dull, boring part is counting & organizing the money / game pieces and finding the cards. The electronic versions make this very snappy, so you can click through an entire game in less than 10 minutes - instead of the minimum 1 hour game that real monopoly takes.

We used to play this online alot - then all the monopoly games disappeared... there's only pay sites left now - nice to see a free one finally come back, I'd been wanting to write my own for a while.

Seems like there's a monopoly on the game of online monopoly.

First Psych (1)

mindbrane (1548037) | more than 4 years ago | (#29362563)

If you played dirty you grabbed your opponent's favourite playing piece. I always favoured the race car.

Re:First Psych (1)

bmecoli (963615) | more than 4 years ago | (#29364635)

If you played dirty you grabbed your opponent's favourite playing piece. I always favoured the race car.

Good to know if I ever play you.

New Idea (-1, Troll)

daveime (1253762) | more than 4 years ago | (#29362629)

How about they update the game ... it's so 20th century.

Instead of the boat, car and dog, the player tokens are now leading members of the Republican and Democratic parties.

You can no longer buy properties, but you can repossess them.

If you find you are running short of cash, and you are the biggest player, you can apply for a government bailout (because you are too big to fail), and all the other players have to repay a portion of your bailout for the next 100 years, every time they pass "Go".

The "chance" cards will be named "Bernies", and each one involves you giving vast sums of money to some shady person with a pronounced nose who doesn't work on Saturdays. But beware, because within the "Bernie" cards is the "go to jail for 135 years card".

The "community chest" cards will be named "Reforms", for example the "healthcare reform" card, where you have to pay even more taxes to subsidise people who aren't even playing the game.

We could call it Obamapoly ?

Re:New Idea (-1, Offtopic)

martas (1439879) | more than 4 years ago | (#29363441)

one more addition, to make it accurate - as long as a group of players have an ongoing game, if any of them suggests that children should study hard and/or wash their hands frequently have to be either crucified, or immediately deported to Kenya.

Apparently... (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29362681)

Its an 'exclusive' club, only allowing in people who are either stupid enough to run Windows, or rich enough to buy Apple PC's.

From the instructions:

1. Download Google SketchUp for free. SketchUp is available for both Windows and Macintosh computers.

Proprietary binary-only software, only available for proprietary binary-only platforms. At least they didn't say "for PC's and Macs".
A "PC" is a piece of hardware, NOT software, which may or MAY NOT be running a Microsoft OS, probably an even better wording would be "available in binary-only format for either PC's running MS Windows or Apple OSX."

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#PC

Google is a great provider of web services. I wish they would stick with the web and quit wasting time with download-only proprietary binary software. Offering software as portable source (or scripts) would be fine, because then one could build a version for any platform.

Re:Apparently... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29365869)

Dude, what is your deal? Calm down.

Not necessarily boring with the right rules (4, Interesting)

frenchbedroom (936100) | more than 4 years ago | (#29362731)

I read some comments about the game being very dull or boring, but I have to play devil's advocate : did you guys play with the real rules ? There's a very misunderstood rule in the game, which is that when you land on a vacant street and you don't want to buy it, it is then AUCTIONED. This is what the game is all about : business ! You can refuse to pay the street at face value and get it at a lower price, or force your opponents to compete for it. This makes the game shorter as you can bankrupt your opponents faster.

Risk on Google Maps (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29362743)

Why not Risk on Google Maps instead? Something like BattleCell [battlecell.com]? For example:
1. Move troops
2. Attack via ship
3. Nuke booby trap cells
4. Allies. (share troops?)
5. Instant Messaging (language translation?)

No flash, of course. That slows everything down. All AJAX instead, which should work nice with the Google Maps API. It has to have decent graphics... so it doesn't look like a web page. Might be a pain to do right in Internet Explorer though.

Something like ICBMs might make things more interesting. Letting people interact from a distance. Maybe something like Scorched Earth; let the player refine the settings to hit their desired target?

Curious to see how this Monopoly will stack up.

Risk on Google Maps instead (5, Interesting)

stavrica (701765) | more than 4 years ago | (#29362805)

Why not Risk on Google Maps instead? Something like BattleCell [battlecell.com] ? It should have:

1. Troops that travel (of course)
2. Ships that can attack by sea (new)
3. Topographic component (altitude matters in a battle)
4. Instant Messaging (language translation?)
5. Allies (allies are important... maybe they can give me stuff?)

It would have to be all AJAX. Flash slows everything down. Plus, Google Maps API is a great AJAX implementation anyhow. The graphics would have to be decent. It can't look like a web page... should look like a console instead... something like Starcraft. That would work.

Ballistic Missiles could make things interesting too. That would be a new concept. But, it would have to be something similar to Scorched Earth that requires players to refine their projectile settings. Maybe make things interesting depending on the warhead used?

Then, one guy can conquer the whole planet... I wonder how that would compare to Monopoly...

Re:Risk on Google Maps instead (4, Insightful)

anarchyboy (720565) | more than 4 years ago | (#29363143)

I don't know what game you are pitching but it doesn't sound like risk.

Re:Risk on Google Maps instead (1)

stavrica (701765) | more than 4 years ago | (#29363293)

I don't know what game you are pitching but it doesn't sound like risk.

Pull my finger and find out.

If you're going to have the whole world playing... (well, a few million players, anyway) ...then 42 countries just won't do. So you'd need to break the world into smaller units... say, 1 minute by 1 minute cells.

Likewise, you can't really do a turn-based system... You'd have to use a time-based troop-earning mechanism instead. But, earning money in time makes a bit more sense than earning troops... so each "cell" can earn some currency every-so-often, and then you can buy the troops with that currency. (or maybe buy a few other extras as well... We've survived Y2K after all, so the board game should evolve into something more current. No?)

...or did you really expect the new Monopoly game to be turn based?

Re:Risk on Google Maps instead (1)

ZosoZ (1603973) | more than 4 years ago | (#29363339)

Ballistic Missiles could make things interesting too.

Let's play Global Thermonuclear War...

Re:Risk on Google Maps instead (1)

martas (1439879) | more than 4 years ago | (#29363429)

Oh, oh, i know a cool new feature to add! To increase the realistic aspect of gameplay, actually perform all the actions users perform in the game! So, for example, if someone buys all the houses in a county, and turns them all into hotels or shopping malls, actually demolish the houses and evict the residents! Or, if someone sends a nuclar missile to DC, players in Richmond would get the full experience by seeing weird flashes of light on the horizon, followed by a radioactive dust cloud, followed by cancer and birth defects. Imagine how cool that would be!

Empire (1)

Shivetya (243324) | more than 4 years ago | (#29363645)

That is a bit closer to what you are describing instead of Risk. Of course any of the good board games from years gone by, like Axis and Allies, could be placed on Google Maps. All we are doing is adding a "dynamic" map.

Now of course I am sure there are people who would take great offense with a war game using Google Maps... like Google, but its just fluff. If the game was good before the use of the Google Maps then it will be good afterward...

Re:Risk on Google Maps instead (1)

cashman73 (855518) | more than 4 years ago | (#29365025)

Forget that! I'd rather just play Global Thermonuclear War? I'm sure it's better in AJAX than over that 300 baud modem used in the movie!

Monopoly is a horrible game (0, Troll)

Jason1729 (561790) | more than 4 years ago | (#29363907)

Why is a game where the main strategy is "pray I get the roll I need" considering such a great game by American? People buy a new edition, play it once, remember how much it sucks and put it on the shelf for the cycle to repeat in 5-10 years.

There's so many amazing board games out there that are about the same complexity as Monopoly but actually fun (Settlers of Catan and Carcassonne for example).

Re:Monopoly is a horrible game (3, Insightful)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 4 years ago | (#29364299)

Why is a game where the main strategy is "pray I get the roll I need" considering such a great game by American?

Because people (gasp!) enjoy it.

People buy a new edition, play it once, remember how much it sucks and put it on the shelf for the cycle to repeat in 5-10 years.

Or not. I play games of Monopoly with friends and family reasonably often, and we always have fun. Remember, just because you think it sucks, doesn't mean everyone else does.

Re:Monopoly is a horrible game (2, Interesting)

CrazedSanity (872448) | more than 4 years ago | (#29365339)

Not only do some people enjoy the game, but some people also modify the game a bit to be more fun. For instance, my family plays using two boards joined at "Go". Twice the monopolies. We add a rule where the utilities are counted as transports ("Railroad Tycoon"), so a person with the entirety of transports on one board gets $800 instead of a measly $200. There's all kinds of other rules we add, like larger/more dice, which works very well on the double-board game.

Re:Monopoly is a horrible game (2, Interesting)

dissy (172727) | more than 4 years ago | (#29366681)

Not only do some people enjoy the game, but some people also modify the game a bit to be more fun.

Speaking of modifying the game. I got really really bored one day and started thinking about creating a monopoly themed game for my place of work.

Among other websites, one of the more interesting ones I came across was:
http://www.boardgamedesign.com/pages/games/custom-opoly.htm [boardgamedesign.com]

While things don't get resellably cheap until you make bulk orders, they do have a prototype service for low (even single) orders, which just costs a bit more. I believe the individual blanks can be ordered under the shopping page there.

There used to be a software package (official no less!) called something along the lines of "Monopoly creation kit" that also let you redesign some of the common elements, and then print out the pieces. But this program is a little hard to find. Personally I didn't think it was as full of an experience as a prototyping service, but ymmv.

I went through the work of making up a 'Custom monopoly check sheet' with the names and groupings of everything in the game listed out with blanks to fill in the new names of things, which makes design a lot easier.

It isn't exactly the cheapest of family fun activities, but could make for a very unforgettable game to a family with young children that already enjoy monopoly. I would have loved to have this ability when I was 10!

Re:Monopoly is a horrible game (1)

Deag (250823) | more than 4 years ago | (#29364543)

That is not how to win, there is a time in every game where you have to take a chance and bargain with other players for property to get some sort of monopoly going and also mortgage everything to build on it.
If you survive a few rounds, and if it is early in the game you probably will, you are flying!
If you conservatively play, you just slowly loose your money to the guy with all the buildings!

Re:Monopoly is a horrible game (0)

Jason1729 (561790) | more than 4 years ago | (#29366059)

You say it right in your strategy...you take a chance...you hope you can survive a few rounds.

Why not have everyone roll the dice, whoever rolls highest wins the came. There's an equal amount of strategy and luck in that "variant". (And fwiw, I usually win because I'm more stubborn and people get bored and make stupid trades just to move things along -- what a great game mechanic).

Re:Monopoly is a horrible game (1)

tlhIngan (30335) | more than 4 years ago | (#29366327)

Why not have everyone roll the dice, whoever rolls highest wins the came. There's an equal amount of strategy and luck in that "variant". (And fwiw, I usually win because I'm more stubborn and people get bored and make stupid trades just to move things along -- what a great game mechanic).

I've found that the cheapest 3 sets of properties gives a huge advantage to the owner. The most expensive properties, not so much. The theory goes that because they're the cheap ones, you can get hotels up and early and start dinging them from the get-go. Plus, owning that side of the board means everyone will hit it sooner or later. Putting up that one hotel on Boardwalk or whatever the last two streets are, gives a greater payout, but fewer people will actually roll to hit it. But own the first 9 streets, yowza. Guaranteed everyone will hit something there soon enough. And it probably cost less, too.

Slow and steady nickle and diming vs. the lucky lotto. (Eventually the guy who owns the most expensive properties will win, but owning the cheapest with hotels weakens everyone else to the point that that endgame isn't usually reached - they're too broke to build!)

Re:Monopoly is a horrible game (1)

Jason1729 (561790) | more than 4 years ago | (#29368193)

There's 8 color groups in the game, so unless you're playing a 2-player game (in which case there is no reason to ever trade unless your opponent is making a stupidly bad play), have 3 color groups at all makes your victory a foregone conclusion.

Not to mention, how do you get the first 3 color groups? luck, luck, luck.

Re:Monopoly is a horrible game (1)

Jason1729 (561790) | more than 4 years ago | (#29366105)

If you conservatively play, you just slowly loose your money to the guy with all the buildings!

Actaully...wow that is insightful. Ford "played" conservatively and so had a much smaller but more stable position. GM "played" agressively, was much larger and more powerful -- and unstable. And then when the economy hit a little bump, Ford won -- well actually the "bank" slapped Ford in the face and emptied the coffers in front of GM.

It may mirror real life, but as a game, it's just a horrible design.

Re:Monopoly is a horrible game (1)

codeguy007 (179016) | more than 4 years ago | (#29367085)

You don't win by mortgaging unless it's to complete the high priced set of properties or put houses on them just before your opponent(s) get to that part of the board.

Re:Monopoly is a horrible game (1)

Explodicle (818405) | more than 4 years ago | (#29365585)

Actually, the game is meant to be simple and frustrating - it was created to spread a political message [wikipedia.org]. You're supposed to play the game, say to yourself "wow, the unlucky are really getting shafted by the lucky", and want to get involved and fix the system.

Re:Monopoly is a horrible game (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29366587)

You've obviously not very good at negotiations. In one game, I got the last railroad from another player, under the condition that she ride for free. I also got a 50% discount if I landed on any of one of my opponent's hotels. The fine art of diplomacy is one that I enjoy. That's also why I enjoy Settlers of Catan and Carcassone. There's also a lot of die rolling in Settlers, and a fair amount of luck, so it's not really fair to criticize one game for it and praise another.
But I agree that Settlers and Carcassone are excellent games, and I enjoy a game of Settlers far more than Monopoly. But most of the time, it comes down to the people you play with.

slashdotted (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29364793)

Who's dumb idea was it to launch with a huge Flash download on the front page?
No wonder it's slashdotted.

Er, not just Google Maps (4, Informative)

Richard Fairhurst (900015) | more than 4 years ago | (#29364877)

It also uses street data from OpenStreetMap [monopolycitystreets.com]. And, you know, this being Slashdot and all, you'd have thought the "open" stuff might be mildly interesting... maybe a bit more so than "New Site Uses The Same Maps API Seven Million Sites Have Used Before". Still, meh.

Drinking Monopoly (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29365351)

How to play Monopoly in College:

Monopoly money is equal to drinks. To find the value of drinks, just truncate the last digit and drink that many(drunk math is hard). 1 drink is apprx. 0.5oz of beer(24/beer) or an equivlant drink of whatever mixed cocktail you made up. Winner is who doesn't puke. At least thats how we played, and it is way funner than this shit game.

Re:Drinking Monopoly (1)

VGPowerlord (621254) | more than 4 years ago | (#29366957)

Are you sure you don't mean dividing by 100 and then rounding? Or are you really taking 40 drinks to buy Boardwalk?

Re:Drinking Monopoly (1)

Dark Kenshin (764678) | more than 4 years ago | (#29372279)

You need to look at the weird math they used to make up what a drink is. I.e. 1 drink = 0.5 oz. He even gives you 1 beer = 24 drinks. So, 40 drinks would be about 2 (12 oz.) beers. This seems reasonable if you use if for every money transaction.

Game Reset (1)

pontifier (601767) | more than 4 years ago | (#29463485)

It seems that the game has been recently reset... maybe about an hour ago... Land grab time!

Re:Game Reset (1)

pontifier (601767) | more than 4 years ago | (#29499641)

To anyone still interested in this, it has become an epic failure...
Millions of people played, cheaters took over, they reset the game, and it still sucks. The rents were increasing more than exponentialy, now they dropped the rents and pissed everyone off. It will be quite interesting to see what happens.
The blog [monopolycitystreets.com] is loaded with complaints.
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...