General Do you enjoy playing Chess?
- Thread starter Jason Waddell
- Start date
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
Interesting that you would use that terminology.
https://wegochess.com/chess-being-solved-why-you-shouldnt-worry/
Nah that’s not relevant. The game is solved and the person who knows the most moves, will always win if that person knows the same moved as the other person + some extra. That is because there is only one random element in the game and that element is a coin flip at the start of the game. The game is severely outdated and would get less than 1 % as much popularity if it was invented in today’s competitive field of games.
Chess is ‘cool’ however because it is old and because everyone has a granddad who taught us how to play when we were kids.
To me the game was fun when my choices mattered.
Chess is ‘cool’ however because it is old and because everyone has a granddad who taught us how to play when we were kids.
To me the game was fun when my choices mattered.
I really don't know if that's true. I'm sure there's an element of psychology, of not being able to read which of many potential lines is the one that your opponent is actually following. You play on the clock too, so you must be able to apply that knowledge under some kind of pressure. I'm not saying you don't have to study to play competitively, but unless you're an actual tournament player I don't know if there's experience enough to assert that its only about knowing lines.
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
A solved game is a game whose outcome (win, lose or draw) can be correctly predicted from any position, assuming that both players play perfectly. For chess, this is not currently the case. Even computers don't have enough computational power to calculate all possible (or even all good) outcomes based on any position, let alone humans, due to the massive amount of options a chess board offers. This is largely because there are so many different pieces with different move options. There are end game states with fewer pieces that are solvable (by a computer), but that doesn't mean the game of chess is solvable. Even if chess were solvable by a computer (which, again, it isn't), it isn't solvable by a human player, meaning no human player can play perfectly. Unlike a game like tic tac toe, where any human can learn the trick that perfectly forces a draw every time, it is literally impossible for a human to perfectly force/predict the outcome of a game of chess every single time.
Obviously, if there is a large skill gap between two players, the better player is going to win a disproportionally large amount of the time. That's true of any (good) sport/game, including Magic the Gathering, though the effect might be stronger in chess? Anyhow, you're free to find the game unfun of course, but 'solved' it is not
PS It's also a misconception that a game can only be 'unsolvable' if it involves random elements. 'Go' is another game with no random elements that famously hasn't been solved. The Wiki article I linked in the first sentence offers more examples, as well as more interesting information on the topic. Here's another interesting post on randomness in (board) games and whether it is required to be non-deterministic.
Obviously, if there is a large skill gap between two players, the better player is going to win a disproportionally large amount of the time. That's true of any (good) sport/game, including Magic the Gathering, though the effect might be stronger in chess? Anyhow, you're free to find the game unfun of course, but 'solved' it is not
PS It's also a misconception that a game can only be 'unsolvable' if it involves random elements. 'Go' is another game with no random elements that famously hasn't been solved. The Wiki article I linked in the first sentence offers more examples, as well as more interesting information on the topic. Here's another interesting post on randomness in (board) games and whether it is required to be non-deterministic.
That’s certainly a lot of words..
Maybe you misunderstand.
What I meant was: Chess hasn’t been fun for me since I was a kid because when I was a kid I was playing the game like games are normally played, I dealt with the situation in strategic ways. However today I would have to think not only three steps ahead but seventythree steps ahead. The game also has no random components unlike modern games and only has a few components unlike modern games who usually have expansions and development. For me this is a no-go. I give it 2/10 based on modern rating and 10/10 for historic rating. The game would not be able to sell today if it was invented today.
Maybe you misunderstand.
What I meant was: Chess hasn’t been fun for me since I was a kid because when I was a kid I was playing the game like games are normally played, I dealt with the situation in strategic ways. However today I would have to think not only three steps ahead but seventythree steps ahead. The game also has no random components unlike modern games and only has a few components unlike modern games who usually have expansions and development. For me this is a no-go. I give it 2/10 based on modern rating and 10/10 for historic rating. The game would not be able to sell today if it was invented today.
Last edited:
Some people like "simpler" games still today. I doubt that just it's historic significance is what drives modern purchase and play of the game. I think that it's still played after so long shows that it is in fact a superior game design compared to most, with lasting power, replayability etc.
You don't have to agree. I think it shows itself as such whether you agree or not, otherwise it wouldn't still be played to such a wide degree after so long. What I don't think it is is an overly "capitalism friendly" game, because there are no expansion packs to coax further money out of players with. Sellability =/= design merit.
Imagine designing chess today and try to sell it. Would be impossible. The game offers almost nothing by today’s standard. Yes the game is simple. As is Ludo and Monopoly. However it does have historic roots. Like the unmentionable fairy tale some people believe in. The best thing it has got going for it is that it is cheap to buy and free to play and win.
There's still a lot of abstract games being designed today, and they generally sell okay. Sure, it's not on the level of Chess or Go, but that's because we already have Chess and Go. There's just a huge market for non-random, simple games without expansions, and something will fill that gap. The most famous series of modern abstract games is probably the GIPF series and they sold pretty well. I do agree that Chess has some funky rules that would be left its design out today, but generally it holds up pretty well. It's history certainly is it's biggers feature.
I really like abstract games, but tend not to have the attention span to deep-dive in their strategies. Chess I enjoy playing every time I'm asked, but would never suggest to play myself.
I really like abstract games, but tend not to have the attention span to deep-dive in their strategies. Chess I enjoy playing every time I'm asked, but would never suggest to play myself.
I'm with Sigh, cup stacking was really big for about a month and I don't think things get much simpler than placing cups on top of one another. Maybe it would be harder for chess to break into the zeitgeist now than previously, but it's also so hard to separate what portion of that is due to chess and what portion is due to people changing.
I'm in the same boat as Ellogeyen, I think, in regards to when I would and wouldn't play chess. It's certainly more enjoyable when I'm not thinking seventy-two moves ahead and neither is the other player, but like in EDH the arms race is inevitable. That said, I think anything you break down to the level that chess has been thought about becomes so far abstracted from the actual experience as to become something else entirely regardless of the subject (computer science, literature, music, food) and doing so can take a lot of the value out of the experience (i.e. there are some things it is more fun to not think about too deeply). When you think of a hot dog as a collection of proteins, lipids, carbohydrates, and other trace molecules, it's vastly different from seeing it as something wonderfully nostalgic you eat at a family cookout. Same with chess, which I think we've all been hinting at.
I'm in the same boat as Ellogeyen, I think, in regards to when I would and wouldn't play chess. It's certainly more enjoyable when I'm not thinking seventy-two moves ahead and neither is the other player, but like in EDH the arms race is inevitable. That said, I think anything you break down to the level that chess has been thought about becomes so far abstracted from the actual experience as to become something else entirely regardless of the subject (computer science, literature, music, food) and doing so can take a lot of the value out of the experience (i.e. there are some things it is more fun to not think about too deeply). When you think of a hot dog as a collection of proteins, lipids, carbohydrates, and other trace molecules, it's vastly different from seeing it as something wonderfully nostalgic you eat at a family cookout. Same with chess, which I think we've all been hinting at.
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
Oh ho ho, never heard of "skins"? https://www.amara.com/products/shagreen-chess-set-chocolate
Also, just because it has nothing to offer to you, doesn't mean it has nothing to offer, period. Chess isn't the only game designed in ages ago, not by a long shot. How many of those other games still enjoy the same popularity chess enjoys nowadays? I think the fact that it did survive the ages, and still is enthusiastically played by many across the world today speaks volumes to its inherent appeal. The fact that its age adds to the appeal of chess doesn't mean age is the only, or even the biggest factor in that appeal.
I'm a big fan of Quarto. If you like these sort of games, it's definitely a recommend! I think it's best described as a cross-over between Set (another favorite) and Tic Tac Toe
How old are you?
Old enough to know how markets work, and to know that humans are more multifaceted than "new shiny games with expansion packs are here, so simple games are a no-go".
"If you tried to design a garden rake these days, it would never sell. they have rotovators/rototillers and power harrows now" like come on.
"If you tried to design a garden rake these days, it would never sell. they have rotovators/rototillers and power harrows now" like come on.
I think I "like" Chess, but I don't "love" Chess.
The coolest moment for me was when I was helping teach out at my Church's family retreat (pre-Covid) for the children and one of my students asked me to play Chess, and I accidentally did the four moves win and then I realized, "oh no, I'm that guy". So I explained and was basically just like,
"Sorry Chess isn't really a game where you can hold back. Also, we're running late for lunch so I guess it's good I beat you."
So while I enjoy the learning and teaching aspects of chess, I don't love playing it. It's kind of like watching Melee or any other competitive fighting game. It is fun to watch and play, but because I know that I'll never be the best, it sucks some of the enjoyment out for me.
Hive is so much fun for me though.
The coolest moment for me was when I was helping teach out at my Church's family retreat (pre-Covid) for the children and one of my students asked me to play Chess, and I accidentally did the four moves win and then I realized, "oh no, I'm that guy". So I explained and was basically just like,
"Sorry Chess isn't really a game where you can hold back. Also, we're running late for lunch so I guess it's good I beat you."
So while I enjoy the learning and teaching aspects of chess, I don't love playing it. It's kind of like watching Melee or any other competitive fighting game. It is fun to watch and play, but because I know that I'll never be the best, it sucks some of the enjoyment out for me.
Hive is so much fun for me though.
Last edited:
my cousin showed me this game and it’s super cool! it is nice that it’s just a goofy little game, so it’s not “solved” by me or anyone who would realistically play with me, so it’s ok if i’m bad at it
