Storm Raven said:
Player 1: Chess is poorly designed because it doesn't take into account real estate management. I think we should redesign the game so people buy and sell property and charge rents.
Player 2: How about you try playing Monopoly instead of chess? It deals with real estate stuff already.
Player 1: You are a big meanie! You shouldn't crush my dreams of changing the rules of chess to incorporate real estate deals!
If that was the sum total of the interaction, you would be right. Comically so, actually.
However, the way I view it is more like this:
Player 1: They came out with this new edition of chess that doesn't have rooks. I like the rest of the changes, but I really think rooks are essential to how I see chess. Can we make use of the good changes, and incorporate rooks? Do you think maybe we could get rooks included in any new edition.
Player 2: Chess is what it is. If you don't like it, don't play.
Player 3: You could use your rook as a playing piece in Monopoly....
Player 4: Rooks aren't really important in chess, at least not IMHO. You could play chess the old way, though. It still has rooks, and is just as valid.
Player 1: But I like most of the other changes.
Player 2: Why do you keep on about this? Chess is what it is.
Player 3: I'm not sure anyone actually used their rooks anyway.
Player 4: You could add the rules you like to the older edition.
Player 1: Why can't I just re-add rooks to the new edition?
etc.