Chess is the best board game

"Extend my previous arguments, since they have not yet been addressed." I have but now Ill do it in a more direct way. "ARGUMENT ONE: Stimulation" My opponents arguments are twofold. The first part brags about how "Chess is completely skill based" which is more of a negative because risk is a great producer of adrenaline. Furthermore monopoly does encourage skill: the skill of knowing when and what to buy and the skill of effective trading (communication) The second part says that monopoly is stagnant while chess is a "different games every single time". First this comment can apply to monopoly too. In monopoly anyone can be the winner and the rules of the game can dramatically change. " Whoever gets houses on the most expensive properties almost inevitably wins." This is laughably untrue. The person who gets all squares of one particular color is more likely to win but first you have to pay for the hotels and there's a good chance that there will be a second person with the same fortune and skill. "ARGUMENT TWO: Language barrier" How can you explain the rules in a unheard language ? Furthermore, it takes effort for one to get used to it ; most young people aren't willing since they've video games. "ARGUMENT THREE: Time" "One could put time constraints on it, but I fail to see how the will reduce the playing time of the game." How can it not ? If you want a quick game then put a time limit. After the time limit is up the person with most money wins (property counted). ::Responding to my opponent:: "As previously mentioned, due to the large amount of ‘chance' involved in Monopoly and the nature of the game, I don't see how it can really be played competitively. " Monopoly isn't lottery instead it is like poker. Now poker does contain luck but its not entirely luck. Why ? Well, monopoly contains trade which needs communication skills, one has to have a somewhat different strategy every time the rules change and one must adapt to the situation they're in and make the best of it. "Furthermore, any game can bring out the passion in its players." However, chess can't be compared. Chess can contain only 2 passionate players while monopoly can have up to 7 people who are striving for the same goal ; the more the merrier. Secondly, chess is abstract while monopoly is easily relatable and even if you're a child you still can imagine that you're a big fat rich greedy guy. "What exactly makes Monopoly better than Risk or The Game of Life?" Well what makes chess better than go ? This debate is about chess versus monopoly. "(Also, is posting Facebook a source? I think not)" Unless, you want a bloody battle of ad hominems don't make such stupid remarks. "The exact same thing could be said about Chess, although it might take a ten year old a bit longer to learn it." And even more for him to get used to it. Chances are the ten year old will get bored and choose a game with more people and a game which produces more adrenalin. The game is monopoly ! "That's 500 years that the game has remained the same. It doesn't need to change. It's the perfect game." There's not a lot you can change... "All of the factors you mentioned don't actually change the game at all" Yes in fact it does change the game, it changes: the speed, strategy, the length, the communication and etcetera. " Monopoly is fun, but can quickly become frustrating. One can make all the right moves and all the right decisions and still lose the game." Bad memories ? Anyhow, this is a positive. You see even bad players have a chance to win and even good players take chances. Moreover, this is rather uncommon but common enough for my opponent to mention hence my points work.