I actually don't mind games that have a high degree of luck involved, though I prefer somewhere around "low" luck. What I do mind is if that luck knocks a player out of a game well before all of the other participants are out, so that there is extreme downtime for one or more players. Games like Ticket to Ride, Lords of Vegas, Power Grid, etc... deal with this by having all players play until the scoring phase at the end. I played Risk Legacy once, and lost before I even took a turn (!). Sure I got back into the game with reduced resources, but I had already really lost the game. Letting people play (mostly) until the end is probably the single biggest requirement aside from actual fun/interesting mechanics.

Those proposals would hardly make things more efficient. Certainly for the traveler, but (as another reply pointed out) ticket prices would skyrocket and the amount of work each airline has to do would similarly increase. The first part of #2 is already present on every airline's website - there are no hidden fees waiting for you at checkout, unless you count options like wi-fi and early boarding. But every single other proposal (especially #4) would be a nightmare for airlines to implement. If airline travel was the only way to get somewhere, then more regulation would make sense, but we can go by car, train, bus, or boat, so forcing airlines to change their product so drastically because most deem it inconvenient is just not reasonable.

Just implementing this aspect would likely not result in airlines not making a profit, but they would make less of a profit than they currently do, and the point of a business is to make as much profit as possible. There's nothing wrong with charging as much as the market will bear. We all want cheap and plentiful non-stops to every point in the country, but that's just not realistic.

Here's an idea: Start your own airline with these features and see how long it lasts.

No, but if you do that multiple times, they will likely ban you from flying with them.

I truly don't get this. How can you claim that a pricing model is insane when people freely pay that amount? The fare from A to B is directly related to demand for the route flown, and not for how many miles the journey is or how many stops the plane makes. It may not be ideal for the traveler, but there are many alternative methods of travel, so go another way if the price doesn't suit you. There are many things that I don't like about air travel, but weird/high pricing is not the fault of the airlines.

That's not true, or at least it isn't for some airlines. I missed a flight after checking my bag once due to an extraordinarily stupid airline employee and an unusually long security line, and my luggage went without me. To make matters worse, I was put on another airline's plane, and when I got to my destination, I had to wait four hours for my original airline's baggage office to re-open because they only operated two flights a day into/out of that airport, and didn't have full time staff. So delays and costs were involved, but certainly not for the airline.

No, I don''t think so. If it was? Brilliant "stunt" releasing all of that embarrassing information and getting the five largest cinema chains to not show their film. They still get my $12 x 2.

Called 'The Inner View'?

I honestly hope that this has The Streisand Effect and breaks every box office record ever. I know that that won't happen, but it would be nice. I was on the fence about seeing this movie before all of the hoopla (Rogen and Franco can be funny, but they can also be not funny at all), but now that some asshole of a dictator says I can't, I'm going to pay for it at least twice. Thankfully, The Plaza Theater (yay Atlanta!?!) has stepped up so that I can.

America! Fuck Yeah!

If you go the non-highway route, it's pretty direct. There's not much "circuitous routing" at all. And compare the airport-to-where-most-people-go fares to other cities' fares - it's quite low. I'm not defending anyone trying to make your ride longer and charging for it, I'm just saying Las Vegas is one of the best cities in the country for cabs if everything's honest. Next time you get in a cab in non-peak times, say "Take Tropicana" if you're going to the South side of the strip, and say, "Take Swenson" if you're going anywhere north of City Center/Planet Hollywood. The cabbie will think you know where you're going and won't take you out of the way.

As far as renting a car goes, it takes an extremely long time unless you go to Hertz or Avis, who invariably charge double or more what the discount places charge. I made the mistake of renting from Dollar one time, and I certainly got what I pad for. At least a dozen people in line and one agent. On subsequent rentals, I see the same thing at Dollar/Fox/etc... - hideous lines and one or maybe two agents. I'd rather spend $15-20 each way on cab fare and save an hour, but if your time is worth nothing, then the discount places may be worth it to you.

I've never seen a limo driver hawking is service there - I'm usually already in a cab, but they do like to negotiate, especially if they're idle (An aisde - always call for a limo and negotiate a free ride when taking multiple people to a strip club. The club pays the driver for each person that enters.) I guess in the case of six people it makes sense (plus, saving time). But six is an exception - usually it's two, or maybe four, people arriving at the same time.

A private limo (sedan, actually) is $50+ one-way, and the shuttle is $13 r/t. How is that not "much more"?

At certain times (generally Friday after rush hour to midnight and Saturday evenings/nights), it is faster and probably cheaper to take the highway to strip hotels on the west side of the strip (it's easier to get to the east side strip hotels going the back way). Anytime you cross (or God forbid have to travel on) the strip in traffic, it adds quite a bit of time/money to your journey. Some west side hotels are inconvenient from any route, though (Monte Carlo and Mirage, and to a slightly lesser extent, Caesar's, immediately come to mind).

I go to Vegas quite a bit, and every taxi driver that I spoke with during the monorail era (when they were talking about or actually extending it) was for it going to the airport. They make more money the more time cabs are occupied, and just going back and forth between the strip and the airport meant waiting in one line or other a great deal of the time. It's much better to take one $50 fare in an hour than two $20 fares. I don't know if the various companies' bottom line would have been affected - probably so, but there would be more cabs available (and thus more revenue) from the strip hotels at peak times (some times it takes quite a while to get a cab) if the monorail extended to the airport.