Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.
Have any of you been playing board games online, during these days of distancing?
I’m looking for games that one can play directly on one’s browser, without having to download stuff.
Chess is one game that is easily available. Lots of great sites, lots. After trying some of them out, I’ve settled on www.chess.com. Their interface seemed the most user friendly.
-------
Other games also are available easily enough, provided you’re willing to download their apps on your phone. But, like I said, I’m not comfortable downloading apps unless absolutely necessary, and am looking for websites that, as with chess, let you just play directly on your desktop browser.
Have any of you been playing board games online, during these days of distancing?
I’m looking for games that one can play directly on one’s browser, without having to download stuff.
Chess is one game that is easily available. Lots of great sites, lots. After trying some of them out, I’ve settled on www.chess.com. Their interface seemed the most user friendly.
-------
Other games also are available easily enough, provided you’re willing to download their apps on your phone. But, like I said, I’m not comfortable downloading apps unless absolutely necessary, and am looking for websites that, as with chess, let you just play directly on your desktop browser.
I've played way too many games at chess.com in the last year. It was actually less then a year. I watched "The Queen's Gambit", decided to play some chess, and then didn't stop.
I don't even like chess all that much. I do, but I'm not obsessed with it. However, chess.com has a feature which I can't seem to experience anywhere else.
On chess.com, I can sign into the site, and play a decent game against a human opponent in ten minutes. (I always play blitz chess. 5 minutes per side.) Not only that, but the opponent is generally at about the same level as me. i.e., the games are competitive. So, chess.com is my go to "break". i.e. I want to spend a few minutes not working, or not doing whatever it is I ought to be doing. I can go there and be guaranteed to be linked with an opponent instantly, in a quick playing game that only takes a few minutes.
If I could find that with any other game, I would play something besides chess sometimes.
I've played way too many games at chess.com in the last year. It was actually less then a year. I watched "The Queen's Gambit", decided to play some chess, and then didn't stop.
I don't even like chess all that much. I do, but I'm not obsessed with it. However, chess.com has a feature which I can't seem to experience anywhere else.
On chess.com, I can sign into the site, and play a decent game against a human opponent in ten minutes. (I always play blitz chess. 5 minutes per side.) Not only that, but the opponent is generally at about the same level as me. i.e., the games are competitive. So, chess.com is my go to "break". i.e. I want to spend a few minutes not working, or not doing whatever it is I ought to be doing. I can go there and be guaranteed to be linked with an opponent instantly, in a quick playing game that only takes a few minutes.
If I could find that with any other game, I would play something besides chess sometimes.
Everyone seems to have been so taken with this Queen's Gambit thing. The movie I mean, not the chess opening, although that too I guess, following the movie. I must be part of a teeny tiny minority that hasn't watched it yet.
As for blitz, I've kind of got hooked to the 10-minute format. That is, 10 minues per side. Shorter than that is much too ...unthinking. (Or it may be that I'm simply not quick-witted enough to play coherent games in that short a span of time.) 10 minutes per seems to hit the sweet spot, for me. (I guess serious chess players will look down on these "blitz" games. That's okay, I'm not a serious chess player, although I do enjoy playing.)
I'd love to be able to play Scrabble, and Bridge as well. Those two, especially. They're available, but only if you download apps. I've not been able to find those games on web browser, not yet that is.
I'd love to be able to play Scrabble, and Bridge as well. Those two, especially. They're available, but only if you download apps. I've not been able to find those games on web browser, not yet that is.
I've never played Bridge at this playok.com, but I've played several other games, and it is quite a good site in general. They offer Bridge, but I can't speak to the user experience of playing there.
Playok.com is close to what I need for a game site in general, but the experience of getting started in a game and matched with an appropriate opponent is not nearly as good as at chess.com.
I've never played Bridge at this playok.com, but I've played several other games, and it is quite a good site in general. They offer Bridge, but I can't speak to the user experience of playing there.
Playok.com is close to what I need for a game site in general, but the experience of getting started in a game and matched with an appropriate opponent is not nearly as good as at chess.com.
(I've only just glanced through it, and bookmarked it for the present. They've got many of the basic board games, and on browser too. Cool! I'll check the site out in more detail later on.)
As for blitz, I've kind of got hooked to the 10-minute format. That is, 10 minues per side. Shorter than that is much too ...unthinking. (Or it may be that I'm simply not quick-witted enough to play coherent games in that short a span of time.) 10 minutes per seems to hit the sweet spot, for me.
Longer time controls are better for learning, if you want to improve overall. 10 minutes is about the cut-off point for useful learning, in that there is enough time to think about moves. Once you get a bit quicker the game becomes less about playing accurately and more about quickly playing moves that aren't bad. You may even learn bad habits that can't translate to longer time controls.
Basically, improving at longer time controls will improve your blitz rating. Improving at blitz will almost certainly not improve your rating at longer time controls, and may even harm it.
(I guess serious chess players will look down on these "blitz" games. That's okay, I'm not a serious chess player, although I do enjoy playing.)
This couldn't be further from the truth. I know you haven't watched The Queen's Gambit yet, but professional chess players have said that it's the most accurate rendition of chess culture yet brought to screen. And one of the things that's completely accurate about it is that during tournaments in the evenings that chess players would go to the local bar, get drunk, and play speed chess with each other.
In fact, WFM Alexadra Botez has said that when she was competing seriously in tournaments, right from when she was a child, she preferred the trash-talking speed chess to the full-on matches.
Not only that, but there are full-on professional speed chess tournaments. Hikaru Nakamura, one of the best chess players on the planet,1 plays a tonne of blitz and bullet. Magnus Carlsen, the best chess player on the planet, and possibly the best chess player who has ever lived,2 also plays a tonne of blitz and bullet.
In fact, here's Carlsen playing an OTB handicapped hyperbullet game, where he has 30 seconds vs his opponent's 2 minutes and 30 seconds:
The chess scene generally isn't as stuffy as it's made out to be. You do get some stuffed shirts who look down on speed chess and, generally, anybody having fun with chess. But that's far from universal.
1He's basically good enough that he can play the joke meme opening the Bongcloud, known for being one of the worst possible openings, against other grandmasters in official competition and still win. He's one of a small number of chess players who are known as "super GMs", in that they're so good that "ordinary" grandmasters don't have much chance against them.
2He certainly plays the best chess that has ever been played, but chess has changed a great deal over the years and especially since computers could easily beat humans. There's no question that he plays the best chess that has ever been played, but there is some debate whether he would be the best vs. previous world champions had he been raised at the same time as them and with the same knowledge they had. But even then, nobody doubts he would still be one of the greatest of all time.
Longer time controls are better for learning, if you want to improve overall. 10 minutes is about the cut-off point for useful learning, in that there is enough time to think about moves. Once you get a bit quicker the game becomes less about playing accurately and more about quickly playing moves that aren't bad. You may even learn bad habits that can't translate to longer time controls.
Basically, improving at longer time controls will improve your blitz rating. Improving at blitz will almost certainly not improve your rating at longer time controls, and may even harm it.
I take your point. Actually when you play offline, you don't really bother with time limits, generally. Which, when you think about it, isn't really fair to those players that tend to take less time over their moves. (I've only started at Chess.com some months ago, and played time-limited games just there, not IRL.)
This couldn't be further from the truth. I know you haven't watched The Queen's Gambit yet, but professional chess players have said that it's the most accurate rendition of chess culture yet brought to screen. And one of the things that's completely accurate about it is that during tournaments in the evenings that chess players would go to the local bar, get drunk, and play speed chess with each other.
In fact, WFM Alexadra Botez has said that when she was competing seriously in tournaments, right from when she was a child, she preferred the trash-talking speed chess to the full-on matches.
Not only that, but there are full-on professional speed chess tournaments. Hikaru Nakamura, one of the best chess players on the planet,1 plays a tonne of blitz and bullet. Magnus Carlsen, the best chess player on the planet, and possibly the best chess player who has ever lived,2 also plays a tonne of blitz and bullet.
In fact, here's Carlsen playing an OTB handicapped hyperbullet game, where he has 30 seconds vs his opponent's 2 minutes and 30 seconds:
The chess scene generally isn't as stuffy as it's made out to be. You do get some stuffed shirts who look down on speed chess and, generally, anybody having fun with chess. But that's far from universal.
1He's basically good enough that he can play the joke meme opening the Bongcloud, known for being one of the worst possible openings, against other grandmasters in official competition and still win. He's one of a small number of chess players who are known as "super GMs", in that they're so good that "ordinary" grandmasters don't have much chance against them.
2He certainly plays the best chess that has ever been played, but chess has changed a great deal over the years and especially since computers could easily beat humans. There's no question that he plays the best chess that has ever been played, but there is some debate whether he would be the best vs. previous world champions had he been raised at the same time as them and with the same knowledge they had. But even then, nobody doubts he would still be one of the greatest of all time.
That video was crazy! If I didn't know better I'd say he's playing random moves! I mean, how do you even think that fast? Different kind of mental equipment than mine, I guess!
And I think I'll get down to watching The Queen's Gambit. Everyone whom I've heard mention that movie, seems to speak well of it.
It depends where you play. Of course not for casual games, but in some clubs and any tournaments, there will be a clock.
I doubt that I played a game of chess for about 20 years, and time was a major factor. I found that once I got a chess clock and was playing in circumstances where I used it, I could enjoy the game more. Without the clock, I always wanted to spend more time on moves, and always knew that my opponent really wanted me to get on with it.
That video was crazy! If I didn't know better I'd say he's playing random moves! I mean, how do you even think that fast? Different kind of mental equipment than mine, I guess!
If you play enough games, and are good at it, you become aware of the patterns. A particular opening always leads to chances on certain squares. An end game with rooks and pawns in certain places goes a certain way. It's somewhat automatic. They know pretty much all the options a few moves in advance.
They make a lot of bad moves in those games, but their bad moves are generally not as bad as our good moves.
I take your point. Actually when you play offline, you don't really bother with time limits, generally. Which, when you think about it, isn't really fair to those players that tend to take less time over their moves. (I've only started at Chess.com some months ago, and played time-limited games just there, not IRL.)
It just depends on what your aim is. If you just want to casually play games without much concern for becoming a better chess player overall, then it doesn't matter what you play. I just thought it worth mentioning because I fairly often see people who want to improve at the whole of chess focusing on time controls that may actually be harming them.
That video was crazy! If I didn't know better I'd say he's playing random moves! I mean, how do you even think that fast? Different kind of mental equipment than mine, I guess!
There are a couple of things. The first is, obviously, he's been playing since he was a kid. It's a known quantity that the best chess players started young. It's like learning a language - you can do it as an adult, but it'll take more work and you'll never achieve the fluency of someone who learnt as a kid.
Secondly, chess is primarily a game of pattern recognition (which is why playing puzzles and learning to spot the patterns can be more helpful for learning than playing chess) and memorisation. The more you see things you recognise, the more you'll know what comes next without having to think about it.
WGM Nemo Zhou played competitively from when she was 3 until she was 17, and at her highest point was the 54th (IIRC) highest-ranked female chess player in the world. But by her own account she studied as little as possible. She calls herself an "instinctive" player who doesn't "like to think". And basically what that means is that she recognises the patterns. She can explain after she's moved the purpose of the move, looking several moves ahead and often accomplishing several things at once, but she's said that the actual thinking comes in the post-hoc explanation.
And the real top-level chess players do do a lot of memorisation. GM Daniel Naroditsky once shared some of his study material, which was just like 50 move sequences from a particular opening and said that he spends hours a day memorising lists like that and that yes it's tedious, but it's what you have to do to play chess at that level. I've seen both Nakamura and Carlsen be asked in interviews about games they played 10-15 years ago, or about games former chess elites played decades before and be able to just rattle off the moves.
Which isn't to take away from their skill and ability to think round problems. Carlsen in particular is known as a "grinder" where even in a losing position he'll just keep playing until he can wring blood from a stone. But speed chess is about playing okay moves quickly, and if you've got "rook goes here, then they move their bishop there, then I move my pawn here, they move their knight there, and my bishop there will win their queen" seared into your brain in the same way that you have "if I vibrate my vocal chords in this particular way I'll make a sound that people recognise as me saying 'hello'" or "if I put my left foot down and bring my right foot up, put my left arm out to the side, grip this with my hand and move it from here to here, bring my arm back up and grip this again, and lift up my left foot and bring my right foot down again, then I can change gear from 3rd to 4th" then you're going to be able to play a lot of decent moves without thinking about it.
Online chess allows you to play even faster, of course, because you don't have to worry about the pieces getting in the way, the physical time it takes to move them, and you can pre-move, which can save a lot of time.
WFM Alexandra Botez is something of a speed chess specialist. GM Daniel Naroditsky is much, much better than her in long time controls, but he's said that in speed chess under time pressure she'll beat him every time. Which helps illustrate that it's a somewhat different skill-set. But to see someone playing chess really quickly, this video has Botez playing a casual handicapped match against a complete amateur, reducing her time controls every game until for the final game she has literally one second to make all her moves against his 10 minutes:
Obviously she couldn't do that against a higher-rated opponent, but it does illustrate how she just knows the patterns without thinking about them, and the power of pre-moves which allow for faster time controls than OTB. It also illustrates the "trash talk" aspect of chess that you don't see in official tournaments.
And I think I'll get down to watching The Queen's Gambit. Everyone whom I've heard mention that movie, seems to speak well of it.
Yeah, it's great. It's not the best thing you'll watch in your life, but it's a gripping story and a lavish production. And professional chess players have said that while it's obviously glamorised and exaggerated for TV that it's actually a very accurate representation of the professional chess world, and the people that you meet playing professional chess. The general consensus seems to be that to make it much more realistic the tournaments should be held in less grandiose places, there should be more drinking and less drug-taking (although not none), and there should be a lot more misogyny. But when, for example, asked about some of the more flamboyant characters I've seen professional chess players either say "um, no comment" with a laugh, or "oh yeah, you definitely meet someone like that at every tournament".
Oh, and the game are all either real games or based on real games from that era. So it makes sense from that point of view, too.
If you are a fan of Dr Who, and of the maths game "2048", this game combines the two. You need to get to know the 12 Doctors in order (yes, I know there are 13, but this game pre-dates Jodie Whittaker's involvement)
...If you play enough games, and are good at it, you become aware of the patterns. A particular opening always leads to chances on certain squares. An end game with rooks and pawns in certain places goes a certain way. It's somewhat automatic. They know pretty much all the options a few moves in advance....
...There are a couple of things. The first is, obviously, he's been playing since he was a kid. It's a known quantity that the best chess players started young. It's like learning a language - you can do it as an adult, but it'll take more work and you'll never achieve the fluency of someone who learnt as a kid.
Secondly, chess is primarily a game of pattern recognition (which is why playing puzzles and learning to spot the patterns can be more helpful for learning than playing chess) and memorisation. The more you see things you recognise, the more you'll know what comes next without having to think about it.
WGM Nemo Zhou played competitively from when she was 3 until she was 17, and at her highest point was the 54th (IIRC) highest-ranked female chess player in the world. But by her own account she studied as little as possible. She calls herself an "instinctive" player who doesn't "like to think". And basically what that means is that she recognises the patterns. She can explain after she's moved the purpose of the move, looking several moves ahead and often accomplishing several things at once, but she's said that the actual thinking comes in the post-hoc explanation.
And the real top-level chess players do do a lot of memorisation. GM Daniel Naroditsky once shared some of his study material, which was just like 50 move sequences from a particular opening and said that he spends hours a day memorising lists like that and that yes it's tedious, but it's what you have to do to play chess at that level. I've seen both Nakamura and Carlsen be asked in interviews about games they played 10-15 years ago, or about games former chess elites played decades before and be able to just rattle off the moves.
Which isn't to take away from their skill and ability to think round problems. Carlsen in particular is known as a "grinder" where even in a losing position he'll just keep playing until he can wring blood from a stone. But speed chess is about playing okay moves quickly, and if you've got "rook goes here, then they move their bishop there, then I move my pawn here, they move their knight there, and my bishop there will win their queen" seared into your brain in the same way that you have "if I vibrate my vocal chords in this particular way I'll make a sound that people recognise as me saying 'hello'" or "if I put my left foot down and bring my right foot up, put my left arm out to the side, grip this with my hand and move it from here to here, bring my arm back up and grip this again, and lift up my left foot and bring my right foot down again, then I can change gear from 3rd to 4th" then you're going to be able to play a lot of decent moves without thinking about it. ...
That makes sense, clearly pattern recognition is a large part of what that kind of game might be about. Because it is difficult to imagine how anyone, no matter how gifted, can actually think out their moves so blindingly fast.
I myself do the ten-minute thing primarily because it's easy enough to fit in a quick match that lasts at most 20 minutes (and quite often less). But having started with the timed matches, I find them growing on me. For instance, when earlier I'd try out different variations --- I don't mean to imply I've a huge repertoire of chess theory and exotic moves in my command, my game is entirely instinctive and untutored --- I'm more inclined, now, to simply go for moves that I've gotten comfortable with. Patterns memorized, like you say, except I realize this only now that you mention this here. Clearly timed games, especially these brief games, do encourage developing skills that are specific to this format, over more rounded thinking.
Also, now that you mention it, that pre-move thing. I confess I do that myself, when the clock's about to run out.
... But to see someone playing chess really quickly, this video has Botez playing a casual handicapped match against a complete amateur, reducing her time controls every game until for the final game she has literally one second to make all her moves against his 10 minutes:
Obviously she couldn't do that against a higher-rated opponent, but it does illustrate how she just knows the patterns without thinking about them, and the power of pre-moves which allow for faster time controls than OTB. It also illustrates the "trash talk" aspect of chess that you don't see in official tournaments. ...
Actually, seeing someone doing it IRL, with real chess pieces and a real chess board, like Magnum Carlsen does in that earlier vid, that makes for more dramatic viewing.
But this video, what Alexandra Botez does there, was just amazing! (She's kind of cute too, incidentally!) I'm going to re-watch it later, to see if I can properly grok those moves. (I'm not nearly good enough to understand such a fast game at just one viewing.) I find it difficult to believe anyone can possibly, unless the match were orchestrated somehow (not that I'm suggesting this one was), actually pull off a 1-second win against a 10-minute clock. Not unless the opponent had zero skill, and probably not even then. Yep, I'll rewatch that video clip later, see if I can figure out the chess in there.
If you are a fan of Dr Who, and of the maths game "2048", this game combines the two. You need to get to know the 12 Doctors in order (yes, I know there are 13, but this game pre-dates Jodie Whittaker's involvement)
TBH, though, neither of those games I've played before. Nor do I know my Dr Who nearly well enough to go for a game based on that theme. But Mah Jong is apparently a very complex game, on par with chess apparently, or so I've heard (I think). I might check it out, although I'll have to learn the game from scratch ... But thanks again, for posting those links.
Actually, seeing someone doing it IRL, with real chess pieces and a real chess board, like Magnum Carlsen does in that earlier vid, that makes for more dramatic viewing.
But this video, what Alexandra Botez does there, was just amazing! (She's kind of cute too, incidentally!) I'm going to re-watch it later, to see if I can properly grok those moves. (I'm not nearly good enough to understand such a fast game at just one viewing.) I find it difficult to believe anyone can possibly, unless the match were orchestrated somehow (not that I'm suggesting this one was), actually pull off a 1-second win against a 10-minute clock. Not unless the opponent had zero skill, and probably not even then. Yep, I'll rewatch that video clip later, see if I can figure out the chess in there.
1 second is definitely extreme, but as I say she's known for being fast. If you enjoy watching content like that there's a tonne of YouTube videos of titled players playing bullet and hyperbullet. The 10/5/1 second thing is rare, but 1 minute or 30 seconds is fairly common.
I used to play daily at Cosmic Encounter Online. It was fairly easy to learn, and free players had enough options to be competitive even though a paid account opened the door to more play styles. You could play against people if they were available, or against fairly competent bots if they were not. Occasionally I wound up in a match with one of the game's creators!
Sadly, the java platform it ran on became obsolete and the developer was unwilling to invest the resources to remake it, especially since the community had significantly diminished. These days the site promotes the virtual board game system that has a Cosmic Encounter module, but I miss the simplicity of jumping into the game and just playing, with clever animations and music.
It has been a long time since I have been on the site, probably a year or two so not sure how much it has changed but I used to like quite a few of the games on pogo.com. Some are club only but there are quite a few decent games for free also. Or at least their used to be.....
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
