I find the time spent waiting for my opponent to make a move one of the most enjoyable parts of the game. The tension can get very thick and thus increase the excitement of the game. Anyone who finds the idle-time boring isn't the target audience for chess. Let those folks enjoy short attention-span games.
I'm sure that chess without turns, or "simultaneous chess" might be interesting, but wouldn't hold my interest long enough. Chess is a game of pure skill... precise calculation... tactical prowess. What you're talking about adds a large element of randomness and perhaps even chaos to the game that denies what makes chess so appealing.
I wonder what kind of rules nightmare this would cause. LOL
First off i'd just like to say hi im new and if your reading this, thanks for taking the time to read this.
Im sure alot of people have played Chess. A LOT of people. But the reason that most people don't play chess is because they say its boring. When I ask them what makes its boring, they tell me that the 'waiting for the their turn' part is boring. To me that makes sense, so what if we were to take out the 'my turn, your turn' part in Chess. Then it wouldn't be so boring.
Don't get me wrong, I am sure many of you are imagining a game with utter chaos and pieces randomly moving without consequence. Yes that would be the initial thoughts and I could try and explain with more detail, but this video is a great example of what I am trying to get at. A game of Chess Without Turns. This would most likely resemble a game of blitz chess. The point of this is to get what you all would think of the idea of Chess Without Turns.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnnh9aKSTLU