Joe FakeName
msg tools
mbmb
Monopoly Millionaire Deal is far inferior to its predecessor, Monopoly Deal. The cards themselves have a cheaper plastic feel. The designers went to town with the bling theme, encrusting diamonds on every card. The "money" doesn't look like monopoly money, but rather like credit used in a future dystopian society out of a Ridley Scott film. The Properties are harder to distinguish, and the white on black background is hard on the eyes. The original resembled the look and feel of the board game classic, which drew people in. The new style brings a lack of familiarity which repels "Monopoly" board game fans from trying the game. The property names such as "Bling Beach" and "Party Plaza" are garbage. The overall look is much more childish.
The gold properties add nothing to the game, as gold rent cards can only be used against one player.
More important, however, is the lack of strategy compared to the original.
Action cards can no longer be monetized, so if you have "Pass Go" as the only card left in your hand, you have to play it, in the original, it would make more sense to monetize it and draw 5 for the next turn.

Money must be paid as rent before property, this cripples any remaining strategy the game may have had. In the original, players had the option to pay a 2M rent with a railroad instead of the 4M in the bank.

Overall, Millionaire Deal is more dumbed-down and childish than the original. It lacks the appeal and charm the original had.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matthew Baldwin
Canada
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Agree here. Forcing someone to pay in money first removes what strategy there was to this game. While overall the game felt about as random as ever, considering the composition of the deck, there did not seem to be any great decisions on a turn-by-turn basis (nor sneaky come-from-behind victories).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
João João
msg tools
Despite my agreement to the criticism regarding designing matters, I don't think the strategy is worst than the original. Let's see:

robotherolove wrote:
The gold properties add nothing to the game, as gold rent cards can only be used against one player.

If you are playing with less than 4 players (and I think they've done wrong writing down on the box 2-5 players, since this is clearly not a game for 5, unlike the old one), the gold properties are the most dangerous group. And the 3 of them, or 2 played with a "double the rent" card, are enough to win the game.

robotherolove wrote:
More important, however, is the lack of strategy compared to the original.
Action cards can no longer be monetized, so if you have "Pass Go" as the only card left in your hand, you have to play it, in the original, it would make more sense to monetize it and draw 5 for the next turn.

This one has no less strategy than the original. On the contrary. Just is tottaly different. If you use the same strategy in this one that you used on the other, It just don´t work. While on the other, you always used all three actions to quickly get rid of all and any cards you have in order to take 5 more, in this one, on the other hand, the best strategy is to play just some cards and keep the best in your hand, as the victory can be quickly achieved using the right cards in the right moment.

robotherolove wrote:
Money must be paid as rent before property, this cripples any remaining strategy the game may have had. In the original, players had the option to pay a 2M rent with a railroad instead of the 4M in the bank.

Of course that, if you could do that, a player with 900 or 950k would shield his money with properties, as in the original game the opposite was done. This is, in fact, one of the things that make the game more interesting, since it can change anytime. And there is no more 2M or 4M (and that uselessly boring 10M bill) to worry about. Now there are only 2 different bill values, 50k and 100k, wich is exactly the best change made on the game, in my view.

RightWrong wrote:
Agree here. Forcing someone to pay in money first removes what strategy there was to this game. While overall the game felt about as random as ever, considering the composition of the deck, there did not seem to be any great decisions on a turn-by-turn basis (nor sneaky come-from-behind victories).

As I told before, this is wrong. Forcing money payment improves strategy since shielding in no longer possible, and come from behind victoyes are, in this way possible and more frequent.

Just two things to point out: complete sets should have been given more value compared with single properties (example, pink should have been 50k, 100k, 200k, instead of 100k, 150k, 200k). Also, there are many dark blue wildcards (they should have replaced one of the green/dark blue and one of the brown/light blue for one light blue/green wild).
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.