Monopoly and Scrabble Coming to XBLA? Update: EA's Plans + Screenshot

RelentlessRolento

RelentlessRolento

CAGiversary!
Feedback
48 (100%)
http://kotaku.com/383039/eas-monopoly-coming-to-360-ps2-wii

just proof this is rolling along

screenshot:

1635_0001.jpg

______________________
http://www.360sync.com/2008/02/11/monopoly-and-scrabble-to-xbla

maybe? here's hoping monopoly does.
 
Im a huge fan of monopoly, but theres a problem with making an xbla version of it. Monopoly takes 5 to 6 hours to play a full game. scrabble while not as fun i think is the only one to really have a shot at making it to xbla.
 
[quote name='a_bleak_tomorrow']Im a huge fan of monopoly, but theres a problem with making an xbla version of it. Monopoly takes 5 to 6 hours to play a full game. scrabble while not as fun i think is the only one to really have a shot at making it to xbla.[/QUOTE]

There's always short game variations of Monopoly. Besides, what is the difference between playing with the same group of friends on Halo for hours and playing one game of Monopoly?
 
Hmm well monopoly would be good as long as they also include a 4 player offline mode. Online is great but I doubt people would even stay that long playing a single game.
 
[quote name='Friend of Sonic']There's always short game variations of Monopoly. Besides, what is the difference between playing with the same group of friends on Halo for hours and playing one game of Monopoly?[/quote]
well a halo match last about 8 to 15 minutes tops and when a friend leaves matchmaking is there to pick up the slack while a game of monopoly even the short versions how long do they typically last? a couple of hours or longer. What happens when someone drops out in monopoly does the computer give there assets to a random player and what if that person dropped because they were going bankrupt. Or maybe it just replaces the person that drops with a computer and then whats the purpose of playing online. like i said i just dont think it will work well as a stand alone xbla version maybe if theres offline multiplayer and the bargaining and auction systems are based on the design of the catan system. you could do it and im sure it will sell i would love to play it with my friends i just dont think the online random matchmaking aspect of the game is gonna be the cat pajamas.
 
[quote name='a_bleak_tomorrow']well a halo match last about 8 to 15 minutes tops and when a friend leaves matchmaking is there to pick up the slack while a game of monopoly even the short versions how long do they typically last? a couple of hours or longer. What happens when someone drops out in monopoly does the computer give there assets to a random player and what if that person dropped because they were going bankrupt. Or maybe it just replaces the person that drops with a computer and then whats the purpose of playing online. like i said i just dont think it will work well as a stand alone xbla version maybe if theres offline multiplayer and the bargaining and auction systems are based on the design of the catan system. you could do it and im sure it will sell i would love to play it with my friends i just dont think the online random matchmaking aspect of the game is gonna be the cat pajamas.[/QUOTE]
Monopoly online works. Games.com was filled with people who wanted to sit for hours and play a game.
 
Ya gotta remember playing IRL is always slower. When it's all automated, the game speeds up considerably. Think of how long a poker game takes IRL, then compare it to Online. No need figuring out a split pot because the 'puter does it for ya. I would at least give it a shot for LIVE.
 
I was just discussing my desire for Monopoly the other day in the OTT.

OP, you may want to change the thread title to "Monopoly"
 
[quote name='munch']Did anyone play Monopoly Party? That was game was hot fire. I'll buy this in a heartbeat.[/quote]

Same thing I was thinking I most definitely would pick up monopoly party and it would be way better if they have 4 player offline. I had monopoly party and it was so sweet im still tryin to buy it for xbox so I can play it. Anywho scrabble i can only see online because you don't want people seeing your letters which will be a drag but meh ill get monopoly first then teh scrabbles
 
I am huge into boardgames, but Monopoly is the laughing stock of the boardgame community and the epitome of ameritrash boardgaming.

Scrabble might be alright in a party game sort of way, but the game would have to include a massive dictionary.
 
... I think InuFaye speaks for me as well.

[quote name='thrustbucket']I am huge into boardgames, but Monopoly is the laughing stock of the boardgame community and the epitome of ameritrash boardgaming.[/quote]

This is the first time I've heard this sentiment expressed before. What's wrong with Monopoly? Loads of people seem to enjoy it, so doesn't that make it a successful boardgame? Or is it a balance / complexity / "D&D was better when you had to figure out weird AC rules" / It's Too Fun For Newbs thing?
 
thrustbucket is right on all accounts! Man, it's nice to see a boardgamer here! What are some of your favs? I like a lot of the medium to light Euros (with a few heavier exceptions like Keythedral, Java, etc.), party games, most of the stuff by Fantasy Flight, a few war games here and there, and a spattering of Columbia block games. While a lot of the snobbier boardgamers look down on the people who like ameritrash crap like Monopoly and Risk, I see it as an opportunity to introduce them further into the realm of good tabletop gaming (even though I always hated Monopoly...always).

If anyone wants to find out about better boardgaming alternatives, head over to www.boardgamegeek.com. It might be intimidating at first, but there is a ton of content to ease newbies in with gateway games suggestions and such.
 
[quote name='InuFaye']
fuck_yeah.gif
[/quote]

fucking awesome, despite the creepiness of putting a young girl alone in a town with 2 grown men, one of whom lives in the sky.

~HotShotX
 
Monopoly Party was bomb. If they can't get a good XBLA version with local 4 player and 4 player online, they should just make a Xbox originals version. When playing 2 player, monopoly party took 45 minutes at the most.
 
[quote name='Gourd']This is the first time I've heard this sentiment expressed before. What's wrong with Monopoly? Loads of people seem to enjoy it, so doesn't that make it a successful boardgame? Or is it a balance / complexity / "D&D was better when you had to figure out weird AC rules" / It's Too Fun For Newbs thing?[/quote]
The common complaint is that Monopoly is far too long and random for what it is. You can get a boardgame with similar mechanics in a Euro which plays in a fraction of the time with a little less luck (or none if you so choose), provides more decisions, and is ultimately more fun. Honestly, it is tough to explain unless someone can actually sit down and show you some games (sort of like describing a theme park like six flags to someone who has only been to carnvials) which is why I highly suggest you check out the descriptions and ratings of some games at boardgamegeek. If you find one that sounds awesome, check it out - you might be very surprised. There are a ton of online shops that will sell these "obscure" games and imports for pretty cheap as well if you don't have a games shop in your area. I personally use www.thoughthammer.com.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']I am huge into boardgames, but Monopoly is the laughing stock of the boardgame community and the epitome of ameritrash boardgaming.

Scrabble might be alright in a party game sort of way, but the game would have to include a massive dictionary.[/quote]

Hey, way to sound like a douche. I'm a big fan of more complex "Euro-style" board games, but why does that make games like Monopoly laughable? I love my 360 but I love my NES games too. One is perhaps simpler than the other, which doesn't make it laughable.

So...off the high horse. Just because Monopoly's popular doesn't make it a bad game.
 
Hell yeaaah Monopoly! I wouldn't mind Scrabble either but the average vocabulary capacity of LIVE players would equal easy wins.

"WHAT DO YOU MEAN N00B ISN'T A WORD!?"
 
This is good news.

For Monopoly it can easily be set to "x" minutes or "x" turns. At the end of "x" minutes or turns the game is over and whoever has the most money (adding up the property, houses, and your cash) can win. I'm just pulling stuff out of my ass.

But really. If you don't want to play a long game online, then you shouldn't play Monopoly online.
 
[quote name='ananag112']I hope the Monopoly contains various themes (Halo themed version of Monopoly anyone?)[/quote]
You made me very excited for Monopoly now. The idea of video game themes, much like uno, would be a really awesome idea. Seeing as EA is making this we could get a Mass Effect theme and sadly a Madden 20XX theme.
 
Well, now that I think about it...there is probably more truth to this story than I thought.

I've seen the E-I-C chatting with a Sierra rep the past couple of days in class. Could be about this?
 
I'd love to see either of these, especially Scrabble. I used to play a lot of Scrabble online. Too bad everyone cheated with anagram solvers :lol:
 
Monopoly is as complex as games like Carcassonne or Catan, maybe even more so if you play correctly with mortgages and auctions.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']I am huge into boardgames, but Monopoly is the laughing stock of the boardgame community and the epitome of ameritrash boardgaming.

Scrabble might be alright in a party game sort of way, but the game would have to include a massive dictionary.[/QUOTE]

[quote name='ThatDamnDave']Hey, way to sound like a douche. I'm a big fan of more complex "Euro-style" board games, but why does that make games like Monopoly laughable? I love my 360 but I love my NES games too. One is perhaps simpler than the other, which doesn't make it laughable.

So...off the high horse. Just because Monopoly's popular doesn't make it a bad game.[/QUOTE]

Now I've seen it all...even board games have an elitist, snobby clique that sneer at the mainstream? Trekkies everywhere suddenly became a little less nerdy by comparison...
 
So now that EA has the Hasbro license do they also have the Dungeons and Dragons license, or is that a separate license that Atari still owns? I would love to see Bioware make Baldur's Gate 3.
 
[quote name='dinovelvet']Now I've seen it all...even board games have an elitist, snobby clique that sneer at the mainstream? Trekkies everywhere suddenly became a little less nerdy by comparison...[/QUOTE]

Yes. I will fully admit I am a boardgame snob.

I am not terribly proud of it though.
 
[quote name='lordwow']Monopoly is as complex as games like Carcassonne or Catan, maybe even more so if you play correctly with mortgages and auctions.[/quote]
Ive played both carcassonne and catan online while they are both pretty good there end game is terrible. They whole adding up points at the end to determine a winner seems like an after thought in game design, at least in risk and monopoly when its over its over you dont have to pull out a sheet of paper and add up all your little points to see which one of you won.
 
Monopoly: Sold. Don't care the price.
Scrabble: Eh. I don't hate it, but I don't love it.

But I think setting Monopoly up with a game time function would be ideal, especially online. And what about limits on the amount of players that can play? I just can't see an eight-person online game of Monopoly going well. Does 4 or 6 sound good to most?
 
Random factoid no one cares about: boardgames are the reason I found CAG (was looking for the website of the creators of Cheapass Games and stumbled upon here).

My contribution: Is it just me or does anyone else think it might be difficult finding quality Scrabble competition on LIVE? Huhuh, I just spelled cock... again.... huhuhuh...
 
[quote name='a_bleak_tomorrow']Ive played both carcassonne and catan online while they are both pretty good there end game is terrible. They whole adding up points at the end to determine a winner seems like an after thought in game design, at least in risk and monopoly when its over its over you dont have to pull out a sheet of paper and add up all your little points to see which one of you won.[/QUOTE]

That's part of the strategy, they expect you to be able to count.
 
[quote name='lordwow']That's part of the strategy, they expect you to be able to count.[/quote]

thats not strategy you play they whole game then at the end you count up and hope you won. thats like saying your strategy in chess is to be able to move the pieces in the correct manner
 
[quote name='a_bleak_tomorrow']thats not strategy you play they whole game then at the end you count up and hope you won. thats like saying your strategy in chess is to be able to move the pieces in the correct manner[/quote]
??? ...But the score is tracked the entire game. The only things added in at the end of a game of Carc are the unfinished features and farmers which are both easily calculated in your head... Catan also has clearly visible scores throughout the entire game. If you're counting and hoping for a win in either game at the end, you weren't paying attention in the first place.

Plus Monopoly and Risk both require far more accounting (mortgages, rent, etc. for Monopoly, troop reinforcements for Risk). They also have much higher number scales to deal with which makes the counting more laborious.
 
[quote name='insertcleverthing']??? ...But the score is tracked the entire game. The only things added in at the end of a game of Carc are the unfinished features and farmers which are both easily calculated in your head... Catan also has clearly visible scores throughout the entire game. If you're counting and hoping for a win in either game at the end, you weren't paying attention in the first place.

Plus Monopoly and Risk both require far more accounting (mortgages, rent, etc. for Monopoly, troop reinforcements for Risk). They also have much higher number scales to deal with which makes the counting more laborious.[/quote]

I think my original comments are being a bit misconstrued the reason I like monopoly and risk better is because there is an ultimate goal that you work towards while playing your role in the game. ie. monopoly your a land baron trying to bankrupt everyone else and come out bloody rich, in risk your play an army general and battle your way towards entire world domination. but in these other board games your not. like in catan your trying to trade and earn enough resources to build up roads and building to ultimately achieve some arbitrary points to declare your self what exactly? king of the cottages because you have the most numbers? carcassone is a kind of a weird beast in that its a tiles game where your trying to make finite structures or roads to score points so its kind of similiar to doing a community barnyard puzzle so that the person that puts the duck head together gets more points that the person that puts together the pigs corkscrew tail. also in my first comment how i mention that these so many points to win games are broken i mean look how many expansion sets there are for the 2 games that you can add on. obviously these game designs had to figure out that they had great ideas for games but there end game design and winning mechanic are flawed
 
[quote name='a_bleak_tomorrow']I think my original comments are being a bit misconstrued the reason I like monopoly and risk better is because there is an ultimate goal that you work towards while playing your role in the game. ie. monopoly your a land baron trying to bankrupt everyone else and come out bloody rich, in risk your play an army general and battle your way towards entire world domination. but in these other board games your not. like in catan your trying to trade and earn enough resources to build up roads and building to ultimately achieve some arbitrary points to declare your self what exactly? king of the cottages because you have the most numbers? carcassone is a kind of a weird beast in that its a tiles game where your trying to make finite structures or roads to score points so its kind of similiar to doing a community barnyard puzzle so that the person that puts the duck head together gets more points that the person that puts together the pigs corkscrew tail. also in my first comment how i mention that these so many points to win games are broken i mean look how many expansion sets there are for the 2 games that you can add on. obviously these game designs had to figure out that they had great ideas for games but there end game design and winning mechanic are flawed[/QUOTE]

I pretty much disagree with everything you've written.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top