Clyde W
United States
Washington
Dist of Columbia
flag msg tools
Red Team
badge
#YOLO
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
enoon wrote:
Octavian wrote:
Antagonistic, insulting, or otherwise disruptive comments ARE NOT welcome here.

Please use the
icon when you see disruptive or antagonistic comments or any other violations of the Community Rules. This serves two purposes:

1- using the
icon will bring that post to the attention of forum moderators so they can deal with it appropriately. We prefer that you not respond to the post directly. Responding invites the offender to continue, and if you respond aggressively you may end up dragging yourself down with the offender.

2- if enough users flag a post using the
icon then that post will be hidden from general view, preventing others from being exposed to it.

Thanks!

I saw only robust and healthy debate. Only the Victorians thought robust discussion could frighten the horses.

Isn't there some kind of age check on BGG sign-ups? I mean we're all adults, at least age-wise, aren't we? We can all accept robust debate, can't we?

bigGameGeek's post seems pretty personal attacky...
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josh
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
While I do get that board games are games, there does seem to be something a touch extra at play here. I don't mean purposefully malignant so much as blithely unaware.

The game itself is a grab bag of mechanics interwoven to make an enjoyable experience. Like it or hate it I think anyone would be hard pressed to find Mombasa to be a game where mechanics are heavily married to the theme. It could be a good(or bad) game with nearly any theme glued onto it.

With that context, AND the fact that the designer/publisher was aware enough to put a disclaimer at the front of the rule book you're left with a very weird scenario.

Someone during the design process thought 'hey, this kind of depicts some horrible stuff without much real cause.' and then all involved were just like 'meh, yeah, but let's stick with this theme anyway.'

I'm being slightly tongue in cheek, but it's not an entirely unfair summary from what we have to go on.

Some games are intentionally about horrible things with a purpose Endeavor or Freedom: The Underground Railroad come to mind. Others stumble into it somewhat unthinkingly Five Tribes 1st ed. or the classic example of 'ooops!' Puerto Rico. This is some weird third subset that I think should probably be avoided in the future.

Thanks to the OP for bringing this up. Good/Bad game there are plenty of Euros out there and I can give this one a miss.

10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Clyde W
United States
Washington
Dist of Columbia
flag msg tools
Red Team
badge
#YOLO
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Toenail21 wrote:
Should we just ignore a part of history and pretend it didn't exist? I see no problem with this. Don't like it (and admittedly I don't. It is a little unsavory.), then don't buy it.
There are, in fact, quite a few topics that have yet to be covered in board games. 9/11, genocide by the Nazis, and school shootings are also dark topics. Are you saying we'd forget those topics if game designers weren't creating games about those topics?
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Derry Salewski
United States
Augusta
Maine
flag msg tools
badge
I'm only happy when it rains...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
clydeiii wrote:
Toenail21 wrote:
Should we just ignore a part of history and pretend it didn't exist? I see no problem with this. Don't like it (and admittedly I don't. It is a little unsavory.), then don't buy it.
There are, in fact, quite a few topics that have yet to be covered in board games. 9/11, genocide by the Nazis, and school shootings are also dark topics. Are you saying we'd forget those topics if game designers weren't creating games about those topics?

Well, Labyrinth.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Clyde W
United States
Washington
Dist of Columbia
flag msg tools
Red Team
badge
#YOLO
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
hestiansun wrote:
minorweavers wrote:

First of all, I am not an OP. My name is Stefan. I'm right here. Hello!

Sorry, I was posting from my phone and after having hit "quote" to reply, it didn't show me the post so I didn't have a reference point to your name. That said, I was under the impression that using "OP" to refer to the original poster of the thread was a common occurrence on the Internet these days, and not something taken in any sort of pejorative sense. If that offended you, I apologize.

minorweavers wrote:

Second of all, I thank you. You've finally given me the sort of reasoned, carefully articulated rebuttal I can appreciate and respect, even if I disagree with your characterization of a number of my arguments.

It's not so much a characterization of your arguments. I fully understand your arguments. I am reframing what you are saying to demonstrate my opinion. It's not a lack of understanding, it's a difference of ultimate opinion.


minorweavers wrote:

And that's exactly my point. I'm not concerned about virulent racists playing this game. Instead, I'm more than a little disturbed by how so many perfectly decent and pleasant board game geeks can passively shrug away any and all moral compunctions about playing a game in which thematic ugliness earns one victory points. That collective indifference is what deflates me.

My point was basically that you seem to suggest that playing a game with a particular theme implies consent with the nature of the theme.

I'm suggesting that most board gamers don't look beyond cubes. As richly thematic as Lords of Waterdeep is, I still look at and see orange and white cubes, not warriors and clerics. And I think for the vast majority of board gamers, that's all it is.

I'm going to assume your comment about how Lords of Waterdeep being deeply thematic is simply sarcasm, since I've never seen a less thematic "theme" game.

Having said that, you make the OP's point. Let's say Lords of Waterdeep wasn't about fantasy lords but instead about white slavers profiting from the sale of black people. Same game, just different theme. Wouldn't you find that reprehensible? The question is does representing that theme in a game "honor" its memory or or does it just come across as, at the least, highly insensitive by the publisher?
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Clyde W
United States
Washington
Dist of Columbia
flag msg tools
Red Team
badge
#YOLO
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: The Corrosive, Passive Bigotry of Mombasa’s Failed Thematic Perspectiv
I'm wondering what would've happened if the OP had just asked, "Should we reward designers and publishers for creating games about the systematic oppression of black people by white people that are played from the perspective of the oppressors?"
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Stegner
United States
Quincy
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
So interesting.

I have been hearing about the psychological tearm white fragility. But this is the first time I have personally experienced it.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josh
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
juggler42 wrote:
So interesting.

I have been hearing about the psychological tearm white fragility. But this is the first time I have personally experienced it.

Would you care to elaborate, or is the click-bait one liner all we get?
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul L
Australia
Canberra
ACT
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks for the thoughtful and well written post, Stefan.
It is difficult to identify when we're crossing into distasteful territory with gaming, as it's easy to hide behind abstraction and handwave the issues away with a dismissive 'it's just a game'. Discussions and reflection about these issues enrich the hobby. While we can steer Germany to victory in a grand strategy ww2 game with a fairly clear conscience (due to the strategic challenge), how far do we drill down before we hit an element that realises the real horror of the task we're 'playing with'? Would Axis and Allies become distasteful for most players if a certain amount of production and resources each turn had to be diverted to the 'Special Treatment' of Jews? What if we just abstract that 'resource soak' into a general 'Police Actions' pool? These are uncomfortable questions to ask, and I think some gamers are really uncomfortable having the bubble popped.

Again, thanks for the food for thought.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Clyde W
United States
Washington
Dist of Columbia
flag msg tools
Red Team
badge
#YOLO
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
scifiantihero wrote:
clydeiii wrote:
Toenail21 wrote:
Should we just ignore a part of history and pretend it didn't exist? I see no problem with this. Don't like it (and admittedly I don't. It is a little unsavory.), then don't buy it.
There are, in fact, quite a few topics that have yet to be covered in board games. 9/11, genocide by the Nazis, and school shootings are also dark topics. Are you saying we'd forget those topics if game designers weren't creating games about those topics?

Well, Labyrinth.
True, Labyrinth: The War on Terror, 2001 – ? exists and had its fair share of controversy surrounding the theme.

But imagine if it weren't US vs terrorists, but four competing terrorist organizations looking to kill as many US citizens as possible. I'd imagine the outrage would be much higher.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ugur Dönmez
Netherlands
Hoofddorp
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
clydeiii wrote:
I'm wondering what would've happened if the OP had just asked, "Should we reward designers and publishers for creating games about the systematic oppression of black people by white people that are played from the perspective of the oppressors?"

I'm wondering what would have happened if the OP had just said "Because of the underlying history of the theme, I am personally very uncomfortable at the thought of playing Mombasa" rather than going some extra miles and using a bunch of fancy words to basically say the designer, the publisher and everyone playing and enjoying the game should be ashamed of themselves...

Too bad thumbs down was removed as an option thumbsdown
25 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dennis Deschildre
Belgium
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
Where is the original post?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mathue Faulkner
United States
Austin
TX
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Tyrael_ wrote:
Where is the original post?
It's been collapsed. You have to click 'show'. People must have been flagging it....
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Franco Antonio Regalado
Philippines
Quezon City
Metro Manila
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I think OP Stefan's riled up about the half-hearted attempt at theme, in the sense that instead of going one of two directions--A) slapping a less politically and culturally-charged theme, such as in your usual fantasy or space game; or B) going with full immersion into the history of your theme and taking the good with the bad, as in something like Pax Porifiriana--the publisher/designer/whoever is responsible chose to stick the theme in there anyway, then try to save face with those who might be offended by it with the whole "not explicitly depicted" blurb in the rulebook. To do so is a bit of a denial, a failure to acknowledge that yes, the game IS all about exploitation, which I think OP sees as a cop-out of sorts.

I'd compare it to sticking "we do not promote slavery" on the rulebook of Five Tribes, and it would feel like a wishy-washy move on their part, as compared to the other two options above.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Vivienne Raper
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Game Knight wrote:
clydeiii wrote:
I'm wondering what would've happened if the OP had just asked, "Should we reward designers and publishers for creating games about the systematic oppression of black people by white people that are played from the perspective of the oppressors?"

I'm wondering what would have happened if the OP had just said "Because of the underlying history of the theme, I am personally very uncomfortable at the thought of playing Mombasa" rather than going some extra miles and using a bunch of fancy words to basically say the designer, the publisher and everyone playing and enjoying the game should be ashamed of themselves...

Too bad thumbs down was removed as an option thumbsdown

I agree with both you and Stefan.

On one hand...

As someone who enjoys thematic games, I found the theme of Mombasa - and the way the designer/publisher dealt with it - somewhat questionable. There's a sense of 'the theme made someone uncomfortable enough to mention it in the rulebook, but... they used it anyhow'.

There isn't a shortage of themes. Feld has managed to theme euros around magical priestesses and catching octopi on a research station. Moreover, Mombasa doesn't confront the theme like Freedom: The Underground Railroad. Instead it sort of glosses over it.

On the other hand...

Most eurogamers don't care much about theme, and it's just pushing cubes around. As such, most players aren't going to be sickened or offended by the theme.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
JM Bosch
United States
Missouri
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Toenail21 wrote:
Should we just ignore a part of history and pretend it didn't exist? I see no problem with this. Don't like it (and admittedly I don't. It is a little unsavory.), then don't buy it.
This idea is such a problem. The answer to the issue “This game handles these historic events in a gross, pro-oppressor way that encourages a perspective of cruel exploitation” is not “YOU MUST NOT WANT PEOPLE TO KNOW THESE THINGS HAPPENED, HUH?! WHY DO YOU WANT TO ERASE HISTORY?!” Why are you even suggesting that people can’t make games about historic, traumatic events, and do so from an empowering perspective? Or follow someone who might be suffering as a result of those historic events as the protagonist? Why must so many people pretend “the way historical information was handled in this one instance is the only way this instance could ever handle this historical material, and anyone criticizing it simply wants bumpers and pillows taped to history so nobody gets pricked on the sharp corners”? It’s absolute nonsense. You can engage with real, serious, even devastating historical events and themes in so, so many ways that aren't the standard "Oh, this is a boardgame about colonialism, so I guess we all have to be colonists trying to steal the most that we can from people to win!"

Big Bad Lex wrote:
However where I think you need 4 pints of perspective is an issue that you address yourself, “Who are we here?”. We are the players of the board game Mombasa and not sympathisers with oppression and cruelty. We are 21st century board games enthusiasts looking for social face to face entertainment.
Do you not see any potential problems in how a group of 21st century board gamers looking for social interaction and fun, do so by choosing a game that incentivizes the exploitation of an oppressed population, based on the actual, real-life exploitation of an oppressed population and divvying up of their continent by western monied interests? Do you not find an odd juxtaposition there? “Hey, what do you guys want to do for fun? Pretend to be colonists of Africa and compete to extract the most wealth and resources from its people for foreign trading companies?”

Quote:
The board game Mombasa may well be themed on a dire period of human history but it does not glorify it or sanction it.
One of the many points made is that, yes, actually, structuring “winning the game” around being the best and most efficient colonial extractor of natural wealth does indeed “glorify” colonial extraction of natural wealth.

Quote:
I continue to be stunned and saddened when people seek out reasons to be offended by a particular board game. Whilst they may well have a games cupboard exclusively containing neutral abstracts, I am yet to meet anyone who was offended by Chess or took to the internet to rail against war games. These examples being pastimes whose very core is the destruction of their opponent.
Why does everyone make this bizarre jump from one extreme to another? Why do you assume people that find playing a game directly based off of real world, historic exploitation to be uncomfortable must absolutely not be able to enjoy any game with any theme based on conflict whatsoever? Or any theme that might in some way slightly reference actual reality? Do you really not see the difference between “abstract,” “thematic fantasy,” “theme based on real events”, and “theme based on real, traumatic, society-destroying events where you play as those society-destroyers?” Abstracted, even direct conflict, like chess or fantastical war games, can be constructive, informative, and even empowering. Trying to simulate being a real life oppressor is most often much less so. (Again, not that a game where you play as the oppressor can't be empowering and informative in a progressive way. It just takes some creativity and ingenuity to structure it in a way that it demonstrates or communicates what's so destructive about their ideologies and actions. Creativity and ingenuity of that type is rarely present in most of these continual releases of games about how great being a colonist is, yet again.)

Quote:
I can see no moral connection with a board game and the historical coat hanger it swings from.
Can you not see any moral connection with a movie’s or a book’s plot and its setting, context, and themes? How they can inform each other to change the reader's perspective on the story's events?

Quote:
However vilifying the game out of respect for those who suffered and died is just brushing history under the carpet.
The most tired and intellectual dishonest argument. “Oh, you don’t like how this game handled this historical theme? Then you must not want that history known, then, huh?” Why do you try to be so intentionally obtuse and pretend you don’t understand that different games can have different takes on the same historical material? Or that historical events can be depicted in countless different ways from so many different perspectives, that designers or publishers choosing the powerful, monied, white, colonialist, oppressor as the protagonists and player-insert perspective YET AGAIN can be seen as offensive?


Don Smith wrote:
I play games where millions are slaughtered in the trenches, people get sent to the guillotine, billions die in pandemics, indigenous people get rolled over by imperial designs etc...Real life history is all these things. Is playing a game based on the Crusades as Saladin anti-Christian? Is playing as the Europeans anti-Muslims?

I don't play games based on "current events" where the "terrorists" are the "bad guys". The real world is far more nuanced than good guys and bad guys. This is contemporary propaganda - not gaming.
Do you not see the possible contradiction here? You recognize “the real world” is far more nuanced than the “bad terrorists vs. good patriots” context a lot of terrorism-based games rely on. But as soon as it’s historicized, you apparently forget or ignore the propagandistic views intertwined within those “real world” events? Why is history, or modern attempts to tell or relive or simulate history, somehow devoid of the same propagandistic efforts? Why do super political, ideological conflicts stop being seen as such as soon as they become "past" to you and the veil of history obscures their mechanisms?
21 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kathryn Harmon
United States
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I agree with Stefan.
Furthermore, games are to be enjoyed, if the theme is distressing enough that it impacts your ability to enjoy it, then get rid of it. Luckily there are a lot of games in this world, and we can choose to play the ones that please us, and leave the rest alone.
Just like I don't play first person shooters and Grand Theft Auto, I choose not to play Mombasa.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Thank you for the thought-provoking post...I personally enjoy larger strategy games themed around colonialism and imperialism because I like historically-based games, and grand strategy games, but I'm also fully cognizant of the underlying systems of exploitation those themes abstract. In fact, I studied the Atlantic World for 5 years as part of my advanced degree program in History that focused on naval and maritime history in the Caribbean from the 15th-early 19th centuries, of which those colonial systems and processes were obviously an integral part.

I came here with a question for the OP, though, rather than wanting to share my perspective on the overall topic. Would you still have an issue if a game allowed players to take on multiple perspectives, rather than just a Euro-centric colonialist one? For example, A Distant Plain in the COIN series lets players (or NPCs in the absence of players) play as the Coalition forces, Afghani government, tribal warlords, and the Taliban; Fire in the Lake does something similar for Vietnam, and are the two in the series I think approach thematically illustrating my question the best. If a similar game released that cast one or more players in the role of European nations, and remaining players as indigenous or exploited parties, all with asymmetric victory conditions, would you consider that more palatable? The "glorification" of the European perspective is still present in the victory conditions for that/those factions, but it's juxtaposed with a more comprehensive picture with the inclusion of other factions that are not automatically relegated to game-controlled background noise.

Basically wondering if you'd consider any inclusion of the colonialist perspective offensive, or if it's the lack of immediate context and alternative perspective that's really the issue for you in a game like Mombasa?
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nick Case
England
Epsom
Surrey
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
https://www.facebook.com/amuse.ment.92
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
JM Bosch wrote:

Do you not see .........

No.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Clyde W
United States
Washington
Dist of Columbia
flag msg tools
Red Team
badge
#YOLO
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
JM Bosch wrote:
Toenail21 wrote:
Should we just ignore a part of history and pretend it didn't exist? I see no problem with this. Don't like it (and admittedly I don't. It is a little unsavory.), then don't buy it.
This idea is such a problem. The answer to the issue “This game handles these historic events in a gross, pro-oppressor way that encourages a perspective of cruel exploitation” is not “YOU MUST NOT WANT PEOPLE TO KNOW THESE THINGS HAPPENED, HUH?! WHY DO YOU WANT TO ERASE HISTORY?!” Why are you even suggesting that people can’t make games about historic, traumatic events, and do so from an empowering perspective? Or follow someone who might be suffering as a result of those historic events as the protagonist? Why must so many people pretend “the way historical information was handled in this one instance is the only way this instance could ever handle this historical material, and anyone criticizing it simply wants bumpers and pillows taped to history so nobody gets pricked on the sharp corners”? It’s absolute nonsense. You can engage with real, serious, even devastating historical events and themes in so, so many ways that aren't the standard "Oh, this is a boardgame about colonialism, so I guess we all have to be colonists trying to steal the most that we can from people to win!"

Big Bad Lex wrote:
However where I think you need 4 pints of perspective is an issue that you address yourself, “Who are we here?”. We are the players of the board game Mombasa and not sympathisers with oppression and cruelty. We are 21st century board games enthusiasts looking for social face to face entertainment.
Do you not see any potential problems in how a group of 21st century board gamers looking for social interaction and fun, do so by choosing a game that incentivizes the exploitation of an oppressed population, based on the actual, real-life exploitation of an oppressed population and divvying up of their continent by western monied interests? Do you not find an odd juxtaposition there? “Hey, what do you guys want to do for fun? Pretend to be colonists of Africa and compete to extract the most wealth and resources from its people for foreign trading companies?”

Quote:
The board game Mombasa may well be themed on a dire period of human history but it does not glorify it or sanction it.
One of the many points made is that, yes, actually, structuring “winning the game” around being the best and most efficient colonial extractor of natural wealth does indeed “glorify” colonial extraction of natural wealth.

Quote:
I continue to be stunned and saddened when people seek out reasons to be offended by a particular board game. Whilst they may well have a games cupboard exclusively containing neutral abstracts, I am yet to meet anyone who was offended by Chess or took to the internet to rail against war games. These examples being pastimes whose very core is the destruction of their opponent.
Why does everyone make this bizarre jump from one extreme to another? Why do you assume people that find playing a game directly based off of real world, historic exploitation to be uncomfortable must absolutely not be able to enjoy any game with any theme based on conflict whatsoever? Or any theme that might in some way slightly reference actual reality? Do you really not see the difference between “abstract,” “thematic fantasy,” “theme based on real events”, and “theme based on real, traumatic, society-destroying events where you play as those society-destroyers?” Abstracted, even direct conflict, like chess or fantastical war games, can be constructive, informative, and even empowering. Trying to simulate being a real life oppressor is most often much less so. (Again, not that a game where you play as the oppressor can't be empowering and informative in a progressive way. It just takes some creativity and ingenuity to structure it in a way that it demonstrates or communicates what's so destructive about their ideologies and actions. Creativity and ingenuity of that type is rarely present in most of these continual releases of games about how great being a colonist is, yet again.)

Quote:
I can see no moral connection with a board game and the historical coat hanger it swings from.
Can you not see any moral connection with a movie’s or a book’s plot and its setting, context, and themes? How they can inform each other to change the reader's perspective on the story's events?

Quote:
However vilifying the game out of respect for those who suffered and died is just brushing history under the carpet.
The most tired and intellectual dishonest argument. “Oh, you don’t like how this game handled this historical theme? Then you must not want that history known, then, huh?” Why do you try to be so intentionally obtuse and pretend you don’t understand that different games can have different takes on the same historical material? Or that historical events can be depicted in countless different ways from so many different perspectives, that designers or publishers choosing the powerful, monied, white, colonialist, oppressor as the protagonists and player-insert perspective YET AGAIN can be seen as offensive?


Don Smith wrote:
I play games where millions are slaughtered in the trenches, people get sent to the guillotine, billions die in pandemics, indigenous people get rolled over by imperial designs etc...Real life history is all these things. Is playing a game based on the Crusades as Saladin anti-Christian? Is playing as the Europeans anti-Muslims?

I don't play games based on "current events" where the "terrorists" are the "bad guys". The real world is far more nuanced than good guys and bad guys. This is contemporary propaganda - not gaming.
Do you not see the possible contradiction here? You recognize “the real world” is far more nuanced than the “bad terrorists vs. good patriots” context a lot of terrorism-based games rely on. But as soon as it’s historicized, you apparently forget or ignore the propagandistic views intertwined within those “real world” events? Why is history, or modern attempts to tell or relive or simulate history, somehow devoid of the same propagandistic efforts? Why do super political, ideological conflicts stop being seen as such as soon as they become "past" to you and the veil of history obscures their mechanisms?
This post is so good.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Clyde W
United States
Washington
Dist of Columbia
flag msg tools
Red Team
badge
#YOLO
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Big Bad Lex wrote:
JM Bosch wrote:

Do you not see .........

No.
Why not?
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dennis Deschildre
Belgium
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
I lol'd when reading this topic. Don't take *everything* too seriously. It's history, how are you going to change that?

After all, Mombasa is a great game and I love it
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
P.D. Magnus
United States
Albany
New York
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
minorweavers wrote:
If you agree with me, please say so. Thumbs just aren’t enough! Otherwise my unpopular viewpoint is about to get roundly pummeled.

I need to think about this more, but I agree that this isn't handled well. It's a shame that the original post was flagged by enough people to be hidden when I clicked over here.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andy Powell
United Kingdom
sHifnal
Shropshire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I haven't played the board game in question.
however, I feel freedom of choice should prevail and what offends one person may not offend another.
There are lots of board games out there, that are about exploitation, killing and war, but it's your choice to buy or even play those types of games.
The world is an evil place with genocide, so called just wars, unjust wars, terrorism and religious wars.
People have been and still are being exploited in one form or another.
If this game offends you so much don't play it.
If the game is deemed by many to offend then sales will reflect this and the game will soon be forgotten.
It would be wrong of me to suggest you play this game and it would be thoughtless of me to say you are wrong in your opinion.
It would also be wrong of me to force my opinion on you.
The game was never on my radar but now because of the discussion it has created I may well look this up, you see any publicity is good publicity.
Please keep playing my friend enjoy your board games and allow others to enjoy theirs, let others choose there own themes and subject matter, having a choice is a positive thing.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Cory Magel
United States
Seattle
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Much ado about nothing.

Say you have a board game about cotton plantations. Someone will be offended if you ignore the concept that slave labor fueled them and don't include it and some will be offended if you do include a mechanic that acknowledges it.

Also, as someone pointed out, are games with massive death involved (any WWII game) somehow exempt from moral dilemmas. After all we're talking massive casualties as a result of direct intent to kill your enemies, not 'mere' slavery of other humans. Yet, we don't see this don't see this kind of conversation going on around Axis and Allies. Massive slaughter is less somehow less distasteful?

You're damned if you do and damned if you don't. So do whatever the hell you want so long as it actually adds positively to the... GAME.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Prev «  1 , 2 , 3  Next »   |