&gt; I don&#x27;t see why a factor of chance makes a game unworthy.<p>Because it often makes it unfun. Not always, of course, many of the highest rated games on the Geek also have random elements. But in the case of, say, Chutes and Ladders, the entire outcome is random. Might as well flip a coin and call it. Why spend the time going up and down the board?<p>For monopoly, a big crime is that it takes a long time to lose. You can spend an hour with no chance of winning, kept alive only by random chance.<p>These are not &#x27;unworthy&#x27;, they are just boring in comparison to many other games. I think people avoid the &#x27;other&#x27; games not because they have some deep subtle appreciation for the merits of the &#x27;bad&#x27; games, but because they haven&#x27;t come across better options. It is rare to find someone who likes Monopoly who can describe another game with the same theme  (not counting Star Wars Monopoly!).