Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Having more than 4 would also incur situations where many people may not even get a chance to play. Imagine a game where the right side of the board kept reversing the flow of play before it gets to the left side of the board, and nobody on the left got to play for an entire round? This makes the game entirely unfair and unpredictable.
When you have a game where a major element is luck, the way it is designed basically dictates and limits the amount of players that could be in any particular round or match.
That being said, it would be interesting to see an 8-16 player tournament style situation, though the games could end up cumulatively taking longer than Monopoly. Nobody wants to sit down and play a single go for 6 hours just to see one player win.