Royal Game of Ur & Monopoly

BGN had a little blurb point to a link to Time Magazine about The Royal Game of Ur .

This is interesting to me, as I love abstract games and the British Museum in general. So it is a nifty article in those regards. The thing that really made me sit up and go "huh?!" was the following:

"the idea of renting out a square was the last "momentous" innovation in board games"

O'rly?

I suppose "momentous" could be argued as the key word, but even then, I think I would disagree with this on many levels. I wouldn't argue that wasn't an important innovation but it sure seems like there have been more innovative mechanisms in board games since Monopoly. If one considers "games" in general you would also have to think about Magic: The Gathering and Dungeons and Dragons as a "momentous" innovations I would think. I suppose they could be considered more of a cultural phenomenon rather than a gaming innovation per se...

Interesting in any case. Submitted for your amusement.
Cheers,
Van

The gaming innovation of Magic is that the rules change as the game is played--changing the rules -is- the game. The rules framework is constant, but the rules themselves are malleable.

Contrast this to Fluxx, in which the the framework is so sparse that there's too much to change, and the competitive element is lost--you don't feel like you are guiding the game anywhere--it's more something you just watch happen.

The innovation of D&D was setting more than anything else really. It's basically a wargame with elves and shit.

How about this line:

"After a lifetime of studying the greatest games, Monopoly is the one he plays most with his five children."

heh

I think this explains it...

"Irving Finkel's unruly beard is a living relic from another era, a gleefully eccentric declaration that he cares little for the conventions of modernity."

I doubt he's seen a game more modern than Monopoly.

Interesting article though. I remember seeing those Ur boards in archaeology books.

BillN