December 12, 2006
I just got my ass soundly kicked in a game of Monopoly. Against Tony, I always get my ass kicked in Monopoly. And Chess. And Risk. But not Chinese Checkers. I can still beat him at two handed Chinese Checkers and I can still win occaisionally at Rummie.
The point of this is that it got me thinking about board games in relation to life. I’ve come to believe that games can say a lot about who you are as a person. Oh, I’m not talking about games that mearly require you to get from point A to point B like “Life” and “Candyland”. But games that take any degree of stratagy can say a lot about a person.
Take monopoly for instance. In the game of Monopoly, I like to aquire the properties. I don’t like to keep my properties mortgaged because I can’t collect rent on them if I do. And I believe in saving up money to pay rent on other properties, but not neccisarily buy houses for my properties. And I actually feel bad taking money on rent. Also, I hate giving others Monopolys. I don’t mind if the colored sections are all divided up and everyone is on equal footing. Meanwhile, Tony collects the properties until he gets a monopoly and he promptly mortgages all of his non-monopoly properties to build houses and hotels. He collects money to build more houses and hotels, saving nothing for rent on other properties, and most fustrating, he constantly gets Free Parking! WTH?!?!
Anyways, the game I do win at, two handed Chinese Checkers? Its really more about plodding across the board. There isn’t a whole hell of a lot of stratagy. You get from point A to point B, but you have to be willing to stay with the crowd so you can jump over other pieces and occasionally it works in your advantage to keep the other player from making those jumps.
So, in conclusion, board games can prove who’s a risk taker, who’s a plodder, and that political affiliations, don’t always co-incide with our true personality traits. Seriously, if they did, wouldn’t the Democrat be less power hungry?