Yeah, the criticism people are marking of CAH is that “Apples to Apples” + “midgets shitting in a bucket” is a pretty weak sauce as far as game design goes.
Everyone whining about taboo breaking and people need to have illicit fun and sticking it to the PC tumblr language police really need to get over themselves. For everyone who keeps going on and on about how the lame edgy offensive jokes don’t win games anyway, then why even have them? Why not just play actual Apples to Apples which has plenty of opportunity for creative combinations and absurdity without having to sit through that one unfunny guy trying to make pedophilia jokes every round?
When I finally tried it, that’s exactly what it felt like to me. And I’m equally uninterested. I don’t hate the games, but I lost interest quite a while ago.
As noted above, this place never has just one opinion. It’s not monolithic, so any argument based in it’s monolithicity is going to be hollow. I’ve also read about it here, never saw a site-wide endorsement (although maybe there were affiliate links?). Anyhow, no worries. Check out those other two games. Good fun, including for some younger ages.
Because CAH is far, far more creative and varied in its possibilities.
And for what it’s worth, the last time I played Apples to Apples, it was with a guy making Holocaust jokes, so it’s not like A2A is G-rated by its nature.
I mean that’s certainly the case, but it sort of plays to their argument that the game becomes something you can only play with close friends. Which is counter to a large part of the point of such party games. One of the more uncomfortable experiences I’ve had recently was playing the game with a mixed group of close friends and more casual acquaintances. In particular this group didn’t seem to realize the problem with throwing every single card that said something racist at the only black guy in the room, and noone else. It wasn’t funny and it grew increasingly awkward and actually racist. Particularly because they had no indication that this guy in particular would find any of that funny (he doesn’t). Our Hispanic and gay friends didn’t make out too well either. Compounding it was the less intimate and close friends nature of the gathering, and the shield of “its just jokes man” which left noone comfortable pointing out the problem (I did anyway, it wasn’t received well). Eventually the host and I just opted to sort of change the subject by first distracting everyone, and then when the game had sort of fallen apart switching over to telestrations. The whole thing was really discouraging and unpleasant.
I’ve cooled on the game considerably since then. Sans intimate knowledge of all the players involved the game sort of pushes you to the easy, offensive cards to get a cheap laugh. And those offensive cards, though limited in number, are even more limited in the kinds of things they’re offensive about. There’s plenty that’s racist against non-whites, not a lot that’s racist towards whites, and very little that I can remember targets specific ethnic groups beyond broad racial categories. And almost none of the cards embody the sort of offensive but specific jokes, quirks, memes that people tend to recognize and joke about from their own backgrounds. There’s tons of misogyny, but very little that goes after men. And what cards that do do these things tend to do so slightly differently. They play less to negative stereotypes or are less out and out cruel. So the game also tends to push you into being a very specific kind of asshole.
While I’d complain that CAH gets overplayed, it obviously is not going to be very fun if the people involved are inclined to keep a swear jar in kitchen. Offensive humor exists, and so does context. Being able play around in a bit of care free offensive humor in a small group setting without having to worry about it turning into a shit-fest of over the top bigotry is nice. Much in the same light, one does not drink with bigoted teetotallers.
You’ve given me flashbacks to the time we had three families plus a set of grandparents playing that game, with the grandparents being ardent Tea Partiers. It was always obvious which cards were theirs, and yes, they always picked each others’ cards when it was their turn to judge. I remember Climate Change being one of the subjects that really brought out the dichotomy. The rest of us just rolled our eyes and played as if they weren’t there.
Same here. My favorite combination of cards I’ve played was
Jeff Goldblum.
Stabbing the shit out of a Capri Sun.
Pretending to care.
I just loved the mental image of it. I suppose it’s taboo because it has a ‘curse word’ in it, but it’s certainly not marginalizing anyone, making some sort of slur against Jeff Goldblum, or counting on poop and sex to make a joke. Pointing to a single anecdotal example is obviously not a strong argument, but still, it reinforces the idea that the game doesn’t mandate being hurtful.
We don’t all play all the same games in all the same ways. I’ve seen some really important discussions come out of CAH, and some very insightful things as well. Painting the game with a broad brush that defines it as a cesspool intended for abuse is sloppy. Might as well also pull down all online games and the entire internet because those things are used in the same way. There are jerks everywhere, and they’re going to be jerks until we train people not to be jerks. But I can’t see where Cards Against Humanity are specifically a problem, or THE problem. Getting rid of Cards Against Humanity isn’t going to solve any problems. That’s the question - will making this go away stop the problem? No? Then it’s a red herring.
I’ve played both Apples to Apples and CAH. In my opinion A2A is an OK game, and CAH is a thoroughly mediocre and overrated ripoff of A2A. I’m not offended by CAH, I don’t keep a swear jar in my kitchen (I’m usually yelling ‘fucking god damn it’ while hurting myself in the kitchen) and I don’t keep a tumblr where I post about all the social injustices in the world.
I just don’t find midgets shitting in a bucket, dead babies, and kiddie pools of semen very funny. Not like “That’s offensive and makes fun of trauma!” not funny, but rather just saying something gross or horrible completely out of context isn’t funny because I’m not 13. CAH basically smells like someone was playing A2A and got frustrated they didn’t have enough opportunities to force a Holocaust joke in somewhere.
Also my favorite tabletop game is The Resistance, because you’ve not really lived until you’ve messed with someone’s head so much they have a minor existential crisis and confessed their guilt on the verge of tears, convinced everyone in the room secretly hates them and knows they’re a traitor.
Agreed. So when it’s Cory loving CAH it’s just a harmless opinion. But the point of the SU&SD article and Leigh’s opinion piece linking to it, is that liking CAH basically proves you have a moral defect. Seriously. Read the article. “Trigger warnings”, “child abuse”, etc. the writers at SU&SD are getting downright serious in their condemnation. They could have just stuck with claiming it’s a one off joke and not funny once you get past the initial tittering and shock value. But they didn’t. They went full on Congressional Hearing on how morally bankrupt it is.
And that is also, as Ladyfingers points out, why many who have been reading BoingBoing since it started feel that BoingBoing has just become another Tumblr page. It DID have a general editorial tone, @AcerPlatanoides. So yes, those of us who saw it as standing for something, and if you go back that far it DID have some strong, monolithic opinions.
So serious tabletop gamer geeks are offended at success of a simple, potentially stupid, game. It is thus with every field.
I suppose it’s taboo because it has a ‘curse word’ in it, but it’s certainly not marginalizing anyone, making some sort of slur against Jeff Goldblum, or counting on poop and sex to make a joke. Pointing to a single anecdotal example is obviously not a strong argument, but still, it reinforces the idea that the game doesn’t mandate being hurtful.