|
Stickman posted:I disagree that representation and diversity aren't important when their not visible, simply because diversity of voices will come through in the works themselves. I think the point of the OP is just that focusing on representation alone is not enough, especially when it puts the responsible on those groups for their under-representation without the systemic problems that make it difficult in the first place. It's simply not possible to improve representation without addresses the barriers that keep people out of the field in the first place. I'm not so sure that just being a person of color will actually cause that person to create more inclusive games (look at Ben Carson for example, he'd probably create a game where black slaves were happy being slaves) People of color who make games based on their experience would be good, but most games aren't based on people's experiences. So instead we need people (and I mean any people of any race) to research the context of their game and make sure that the context is either fully explained (ie. Endeavor) or fully integrated (ie Archipelago).
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2020 19:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 18:18 |
|
|
Everyone makes games based on their lived experience, just like any other art. It's not on underrepresented groups to make games that explicitly spell out "their experience" for white folks, but increasing diversity will increase the breadth of voice, which is both good and necessary. It's just that increased diversity of voice and experience is a goal, not a plan, and that's why it's important to do all the things that your suggesting AND address the cultural barriers and toxicity inherent in the board gaming community.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2020 19:16
|
|
|
Stickman posted:Everyone makes games based on their lived experience, just like any other art. It's not on underrepresented groups to make games that explicitly spell out "their experience" for white folks, but increasing diversity will increase the breadth of voice, which is both good and necessary. OK I understand now, certainly. I don't know if there are barriers to people of color to make games. Candice Harris is making a game right now! I'm going to introduce her to Rio Grande Games when she's ready (I know the Project Manager really well) and maybe they'll publish her game. We'll see how her search for a publisher goes. I'll keep you folks updated. Note I have not played the game nor will I be playing the game as I've stepped away from playtesting.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2020 19:20
|
|
|
Back again with more basic questions: When it comes to Ticket to Ride, are the different locations just that - different locations? We were going to try and get the Asia one u less there’s some specific reason we should get the normal one first.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2020 20:10
|
|
|
I can't remember off the top of my head but I think Ticket to Ride: Europe added some significant gameplay changes? I'm not sure if other regions do the same. As far as I know though they're all standalone so feel free to pick whichever one you want. The base game is perfectly playable, and I remember Europe being good too when I played it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2020 20:15
|
|
|
I want to shout out Steampunk Rally for having pretty decent representation in its cast of characters.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2020 20:21
|
|
|
LODGE NORTH posted:Back again with more basic questions: When it comes to Ticket to Ride, are the different locations just that - different locations? We were going to try and get the Asia one u less there’s some specific reason we should get the normal one first. Depending on your player count, Nordic is a really good one for 2-3 players. Tight and can get mean too. FulsomFrank fucked around with this message at 20:39 on Jun 16, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2020 20:25
|
|
|
LODGE NORTH posted:Back again with more basic questions: When it comes to Ticket to Ride, are the different locations just that - different locations? We were going to try and get the Asia one u less there’s some specific reason we should get the normal one first. Some of the expansions are just the board and no basic components. The different boards tend to have some different rules associated with them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2020 20:41
|
|
|
Shadow225 posted:I want to shout out Steampunk Rally for having pretty decent representation in its cast of characters. Yeah if I wasn't so budget crunched I'd have backed it. I still hope to get a retail copy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2020 21:13
|
|
|
LODGE NORTH posted:Back again with more basic questions: When it comes to Ticket to Ride, are the different locations just that - different locations? We were going to try and get the Asia one u less there’s some specific reason we should get the normal one first. It looks like Asia is an expansion, and doesn’t have all the components you would need to play.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2020 21:47
|
|
|
Triskelli posted:It looks like Asia is an expansion, and doesn’t have all the components you would need to play. Heh. If I wasn’t as lazy as I am, a simple Google search would’ve showed me the right info. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2020 01:15
|
|
|
Mayveena posted:OK I understand now, certainly. I don't know if there are barriers to people of color to make games. Candice Harris is making a game right now! I'm going to introduce her to Rio Grande Games when she's ready (I know the Project Manager really well) and maybe they'll publish her game. We'll see how her search for a publisher goes. I'll keep you folks updated. Note I have not played the game nor will I be playing the game as I've stepped away from playtesting. My suspicion is that there are opportunity barriers in addition to the more obvious ones involving direct prejudice. e.g. I thought about that shitlord up thread and I bet he's a trust fund kid or has some other passive income and wealth which allows him to design games for the love of it and not care if he's getting paid squat, and possibly footing some publication cost, and he probably had business connections to get his foot in the door, and the money to finance going to every con and travelling to meetings to make it happen. It's the only explanation I can think of for how someone could get 20 completely poo poo games published. The majority of trust fund fuckwads are white. And people like him make it harder for people who can't afford to do it out of pure love to devote themselves to the craft. He looks the part, too. It's a lot like the art world. Now reflecting on what you've been saying, to me it sounds as if the main thing that people/the community could do is to make an active effort to support POC as reviewers and playtesters, and to help to increase their influence and to listen to their feedback in the design process.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2020 01:31
|
|
|
I like that idea. Watch It Played but POC would be fantastic
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2020 02:23
|
|
|
Shadow225 posted:I like that idea. Watch It Played but POC would be fantastic Should probably work on the name, though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2020 03:21
|
|
|
CommonShore posted:How does this reach out to people who are less engaged in the board game metadiscourse? Is it a trickle-down effect where game design and publication slowly responds to the critical discussion? How does this look for existing problematic designs? Would it be better for something like Puerto Rico to do what it can to mitigate the awfulness of what it's actually representing (purple colonists instead of brown, changing the names of various slavery-associated buildings such as "Hacienda" perhaps) or to face and accept that history behind its theme and represent it plainly? Or is there a way to do both together? I think there comes a point where you just have to say the game cannot be redeemed really. Picking out a really egregious example, Colonial. The game is mechanically fine, nothing wrong there. But a big part of the game is slave trading and working out when to get in and out of the slave trade. Now you could reskin it and make the slaves some other resource and the game would remain mechanically the same, but then you still have the Race for Africa but for...reasons? You could retheme the whole game in space so at least it doesn't directly relate to peoples history that might be better? I just don't think you can, in the context of playing a game, turn Colonial into a teachable moment when you're saying slavery is bad but at the same time it's big points. I think it is contingent on publishers now that if someone came to the table with a game like Colonial they would not publish it as is. Just as you could make a compelling train game about shipping people to concentration camps in 1940's Germany you shouldn't and no one would. Aramoro fucked around with this message at 12:49 on Jun 17, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2020 12:04
|
|
|
Aramoro posted:Just as you could make a compelling train game about shipping people to concentration camps in 1940's Germany you shouldn't and no one would. Funny you mention that. https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/63933/train
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2020 13:28
|
|
|
Crackbone posted:Funny you mention that. Train isn't really a game, though. It was an art piece.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2020 13:52
|
|
|
Jedit posted:Train isn't really a game, though. It was an art piece. It can be both - I mean it is in BGG's site as a game.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2020 14:09
|
|
|
And it's on Art Piece Nerd as art!
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2020 14:39
|
|
|
But is there a TTS mod?
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2020 15:05
|
|
|
If so, it better involve you messing around with the physics engine to break the pane of glass.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2020 16:12
|
|
|
Aramoro posted:I just don't think you can, in the context of playing a game, turn Colonial into a teachable moment when you're saying slavery is bad but at the same time it's big points. I don't see why pointing out that slavery is bad and also having it be worth big points is exclusive. Having slavery built in to the actual incentive structure of a game is a far better way to explain the systemic nature of slavery than having it exist as an abstract outside moral element within a game. The whole reason the slave trade existed is that it was, in fact, profitable. Obfuscating that fact - that the logic of empire was predicated upon profitability and slavery was a means in service of that - is just saying "slavery is bad, and came out of thin air like magic"
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2020 16:26
|
|
|
Endeavour makes slavery a cheap way to get significant benefits but the main game also includes an emancipation mechanic (that penalises people who have used slavery) and two expansion modules based around the fight against slavery.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2020 16:33
|
|
|
Yeah Endeavor is the only colonization game I can think of that incorporates slavery as a teachable moment- Archipelago fumbles its attempts to grapple with the subject while Puerto Rico is actively trying to ignore it. E: although you bring up a good point Stickman, even stuff like Endeavor or Underground abstracts away the pain involved, and is only teachable inasmuch as “this was an economic choice people made, and you are currently making. Triskelli fucked around with this message at 16:45 on Jun 17, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2020 16:37
|
|
|
Pretty much every game that pretends to be “teaching” something about the economic forces driving slavery/colonialism/etc, also abstracts away all the misery and destruction that resulted from those systems. And the economic factors themselves to the point that there’s really not much applicable to real-world history or economics. It no doubt could be done, but it would require a great deal of thought and care. E: I’ll have to check out Endeavor, thanks!
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2020 16:39
|
|
|
Stickman posted:Pretty much every game that pretends to be “teaching” something about the economic forces driving slavery/colonialism/etc, also abstracts away all the misery and destruction that resulted from those systems. And the economic factors themselves to the point that there’s really not much applicable to real-world history or economics. I started to type "I wonder if there could be a game where you have to care for the people you're exploiting" and then I realized that it would just become Dungeon Petz with a worse theme.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2020 16:41
|
|
|
Impermanent posted:I don't see why pointing out that slavery is bad and also having it be worth big points is exclusive. Having slavery built in to the actual incentive structure of a game is a far better way to explain the systemic nature of slavery than having it exist as an abstract outside moral element within a game. The whole reason the slave trade existed is that it was, in fact, profitable. Obfuscating that fact - that the logic of empire was predicated upon profitability and slavery was a means in service of that - is just saying "slavery is bad, and came out of thin air like magic" Because you play games for fun, it's entertainment. If your idea of fun is maximising your profits from buying and selling slaves then fine, you do you, but I don't think games like that have a place in board gaming in 2020. The idea you would play Colonial and come out the other side thinking 'gee golly now I understand the systemic nature of slavery' is a joke. Slavery is totally abstracted away in the game, just cubes on the board and coins in your bank. So what? You leave the game with the new knowledge that slavery was really profitable? Even the very idea that it's ok to make a game about it shows how far boardgaming has to come really.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2020 16:47
|
|
|
Are there any commercial board games that succeed in making you feel like scum for playing? That’s the pitch behind the videogame “Spec Ops: The Line”. John Company and An Infamous Traffic attempt this by contrasting the fact that you’re tearing down nations to buy dumb hats for vps. Still, “buy this game so we can make you feel like garbage” seems like a losing proposition
Triskelli fucked around with this message at 17:58 on Jun 17, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2020 16:58
|
|
|
Aramoro posted:Because you play games for fun, it's entertainment. If your idea of fun is maximising your profits from buying and selling slaves then fine, you do you, but I don't think games like that have a place in board gaming in 2020. The idea you would play Colonial and come out the other side thinking 'gee golly now I understand the systemic nature of slavery' is a joke. Slavery is totally abstracted away in the game, just cubes on the board and coins in your bank. So what? You leave the game with the new knowledge that slavery was really profitable? What are your thoughts on war games or historical simulations where one or both sides are literally awful? Right now I'm thinking about Cuba Libre, where there's a picture in the rule book of Batista grinning with a glib caption (from memory) "no problem! I have sweeps, air strikes, and reprisals!" but the question could apply to pretty much any war game. In something like Guns of Gettysburg there's quite a bit of horror being abstracted away, in that respect, and one side is literally fighting to protect the institution of chattel slavery. (disclaimer: not "both sidesing" or "slippery slope" here, actually trying to find the extents of the problem and draw it into clearer focus).
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2020 16:59
|
|
|
Triskelli posted:Are there any board games that succeed in making you feel like scum for playing? That’s the pitch behind the videogame “Spec Ops: The Line”, and while John Company and An Infamous Traffic attempt this by contrasting the fact that you’re tearing down nations to buy dumb hats for vps. Still, “buy this game so we can make you feel like garbage” seems like a losing proposition Meltwater? But in a good way.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2020 17:03
|
|
|
silvergoose posted:Meltwater? But in a good way. Haha, I was going to say "Why would you attack GutterOwl so directly?" Make more games GO.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2020 17:16
|
|
|
CommonShore posted:What are your thoughts on war games or historical simulations where one or both sides are literally awful? Right now I'm thinking about Cuba Libre, where there's a picture in the rule book of Batista grinning with a glib caption (from memory) "no problem! I have sweeps, air strikes, and reprisals!" but the question could apply to pretty much any war game. In something like Guns of Gettysburg there's quite a bit of horror being abstracted away, in that respect, and one side is literally fighting to protect the institution of chattel slavery. It's not the abstraction of the horrors of the situation. It's that buying and selling people as a game mechanic as if they were silk or gold trivialises the slave trade. If you want to re-fight Gettysburg then go for it, see if your tactical choices make the grade. Colonial is not a game about the slave trade, it's game where slaves are a commodity to be exploited to help you make a profit. I would hope now a days a publisher wouldn't publish a game with that as a mechanic, just as they wouldn't publish a game about concentration camps. The theme is some games is always going to be divisive. There will be people who dislike playing Cuba Libre because of the theme. I can see people having a problem with games like Whitehall Mystery which is a game about murdering and dismembering women, great game but ooft that theme. If you're serious about making boardgaming more inclusive of people who are not just straight white men then it's worth considering if games about glorying the economic benefits of slavery or murdering women is what we need.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2020 17:19
|
|
|
silvergoose posted:Meltwater? But in a good way. Ravendas posted:Haha, I was going to say "Why would you attack GutterOwl so directly?" Fine, I’ve meant to get it for ages, buying a copy ASAP
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2020 17:19
|
|
|
Aramoro posted:It's not the abstraction of the horrors of the situation. It's that buying and selling people as a game mechanic as if they were silk or gold trivialises the slave trade. If you want to re-fight Gettysburg then go for it, see if your tactical choices make the grade. Colonial is not a game about the slave trade, it's game where slaves are a commodity to be exploited to help you make a profit. I would hope now a days a publisher wouldn't publish a game with that as a mechanic, just as they wouldn't publish a game about concentration camps. Fair. I suppose it won't always be possible to make up a list which says "these things ok" and "these things aren't" - it requires discussion and reflection.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2020 17:28
|
|
|
Colonial Twilight has concentration camps as a COIN mechanic.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2020 17:50
|
|
|
Triskelli posted:Are there any board games that succeed in making you feel like scum for playing? That’s the pitch behind the videogame “Spec Ops: The Line”, and while John Company and An Infamous Traffic attempt this by contrasting the fact that you’re tearing down nations to buy dumb hats for vps. Still, “buy this game so we can make you feel like garbage” seems like a losing proposition Fire in the Lake hit us pretty hard when a specific card was played showing dead civilians (real photos). It completely pulled one guy out of the game and it was too much for him. We haven't played it again since (and it was his game).
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2020 17:54
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:Fire in the Lake hit us pretty hard when a specific card was played showing dead civilians (real photos). It completely pulled one guy out of the game and it was too much for him. We haven't played it again since (and it was his game). I had a similar experience playing Andean Abyss. There's a card that through text and photo portrays your faction carrying out extrajudicial killings. It really hit me hard -- I had a friend who was held hostage by FARC for about a year, too, do that didn't help -- but I respected the game for not avoiding the horrific aspects of the real conflict it was portraying. It was a lot better than Labyrinth: War on Terror which was such a cartoonishly pro-American version of that conflict that I never want to play it again. Maybe Andean Abyss is just as bad and I just don't know enough about it to see it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2020 18:03
|
|
|
SelenicMartian posted:Colonial Twilight has concentration camps as a COIN mechanic. Yeah this is the kind of thing i was thinking about when I asked about Wargames. Twilight Struggle has you organizing coups just as a matter of course. "Terror" is a commonplace action in pretty much every COIN, also "Kidnapping" "Reprisal" etc. So many games have actions/mechanic/themes that just make you go "ew" when you really stop and think about what has been abstracted. I'm not sure if it's better or worse when it's historically particular the way a COIN game is vs abstracting it into something commonplace and everyday. (This isn't an apologia for trading slaves as a commodity in the above-mentioned game that I haven't played) I agree that modelling how a battle or war plays out on a tactical/operationa/strategic level is ok. I agree that rewarding selling slaves for coins is pretty gross. It's the space in between that I'm having trouble wrapping my head around.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2020 18:03
|
|
|
CommonShore posted:Twilight Struggle has you organizing coups just as a matter of course. I really like Mark from SVWAG's take on TS in that he sees it as a complete satire and takedown of cold war politics and policies.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2020 18:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 18:18 |
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:I really like Mark from SVWAG's take on TS in that he sees it as a complete satire and takedown of cold war politics and policies. Now we're at the irony problem e.g. ironic racism. I don't think many people will catch the satire. (Sorry about leaning into this topic really hard. I'm not meaning to be confrontational or tedious - I'm about to do an online lecture on Nazi propaganda in Vonnegut's Mother Night, which is about a war criminal propagandist who claims to have been just pretending to be a Nazi, so the question of representation vs intention is at the front of my mind.)
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2020 18:12
|
|