Privacy by USAopoly Review


Privacy by USAopoly Review 1

Publisher: USAopoly

Game Type: Social, Party

Designer: Reinhard Staupe

Initial Year of Release: 2004 (2018 Re-Release)

Artist: Oliver Freudenreich

Theme and What is it?

Privacy by USAopoly Review 2If your friends were completely honest and never cheated at board games, imagine finding out that one of them, 1 of 8 for example, had some sort of really weird kink…

Yes, this is that sort of game. Would you ever allow any of those 8 friends, if you did not know which one was the weirdo, near your family again?

Gameplay Mechanics

The active player reads a question, everyone else puts an answer into a blind box. Now everyone guesses how many people answered affirmatively the question, regardless of how strange it is.

If you guess correctly, you score two points, if you guess nearly correctly, you score 1 point. First to 21 wins.

Initial Impressions

Privacy by USAopoly Review 3

I wanted to like this game. Simple play, that can make anyone at the table extremely uncomfortable. Sounds like a blast.

Game Build Quality

The game is solid. Everything works exactly as it should.

Artistic Direction

I am a fan of simple yet functional art. This game does not disappoint. Nothing is extraneous.

Fun Factor

I wanted a game like this to open a bit of disfunctionality. It did. I don’t know if that is fun.

Age Range & Weight

The game suggests 14+. This is one of the few games I really disagree with that analysis. Any game that discusses sex so candidly in this day and age, should not in my opinion be played with anyone under the age of consent. I personally might steer clear of anyone less than 21.

I don’t care to know about their sex life, or them about mine.


Privacy by USAopoly Review 4

I really wanted to like this game. It wasn’t for me, at least with the group that we played with.

The practical reality is, I really don’t want to know that much about anyone. I think there are some people who will really enjoy the level of discomfort that Privacy brings, or rather the lack thereof.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here