The Boardgame You Only Play Once

[Telefrog]

Train (http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2009/06/24/can-you-make-a-board-game-about-the-holocaust-meet-train/)

Some people approach the game and see it for what it is immediately, and their reaction is no less visceral than those who play the game. There are those who play all the way until the end and then realize where the trains were going - and it is such a steep drop. People become nauseated. Their faces flush. People have cried. There is always a one-hour period of discussion after (or two hours at MIT).

With that singular "Halo" exception, no one has ever wanted to play again. There is then the second experience, one of watching the game being played. I have watched it dozens of times now, and it still nauseates me when people put the passengers in the cars. I am fascinated when one player figures it out - puts it together - and suddenly stops his or her progression toward the end and instead works diligently to thwart everyone else. This player will often immediately request the rules wondering how he or she can subvert the system to save everyone. The dynamics of the experience are fascinating, moving and emotional for everyone, me included.


Would you play it? Would you try to win?

[J Arcane]

So misery tourism makes it to the board game world, I see.

Fuck this sort of exploitative garbage.

[Dr. Quasius]

Would you play it? Would you try to win?

Isn't the game supposed to be played without knowledge of the ultimate goal? Wouldn't knowing the intended outcome ruin the social experiment?

[Telefrog]

So misery tourism makes it to the board game world, I see.

Fuck this sort of exploitative garbage.

Uhm... Did you read the article? Games for Change (http://www.gamesforchange.org/) is a well respected organization that focuses on using "games" to educate and encourage discussion.

Aren't you the one that started a thread about Real Lives?

[Telefrog]

Isn't the game supposed to be played without knowledge of the ultimate goal? Wouldn't knowing the intended outcome ruin the social experiment?

I think knowing the outcome would certainly color the experience. Frankly, I have no idea how someone from North America or Europe that graduated from high school could play this game and not immediately have suspicions based on cramming people into boxcars. There's only two scenarios that immediately calls up in my mind; hobos or The Holocaust. Playing on the broken window definitely seals the deal.

I think that even if the group of players knew the outcome, there would still be some value from observing the session. Would a CoG "gamer" crowd not care about the fluff and still try to beat the game? After all, getting a BJ from a hooker in GTA or absorbing a civilian in Prototype is just a game mechanic for a health powerup, right? Or, would a more savvy gamer group try to work together to subvert the rules?

[J Arcane]

Uhm... Did you read the article? Games for Change (http://www.gamesforchange.org/) is a well respected organization that focuses on using "games" to educate and encourage discussion.

Aren't you the one that started a thread about Real Lives?
I don't pretend to gain any meaningful insight as to what it's truly like to live in the Ethiopian desert from Real Lives.

This kind of shit is, frankly, offensive as fuck in my book, to pretend at knowing a goddamn thing about what the people that went through it actually experienced, just because you played some artificially constructed and manipulated game scenario.

It, like similar projects that have come before it in the TRPG world, frankly come across as nothing so much as insulting to the people who actually suffered through such ordeals.

It's middle class boredom and liberal guilt coming together in the ultimate of pretentious twaddle.

[Laughing Penguin]

My ability to take the project seriously fell apart once I read the following segment fo text:

The typewriter [a machine once used by the SS which is part of the game] was probably the most significant piece to add to the game. The rules that people followed, the Nazi rules, were horrible rules. They were the system behind the travesty. Selecting the typewriter seemed simultaneously right and horrible. I still am uncomfortable with it. Since the rules of a game are the game, however, I didn’t feel it could be done authentically any other way.

So the symbol of Nazi oppression was the evil Typewriter?!? Is the creator so young and sheltered that the only connection she can make with a typewriter are those horrible Nazis? I bet if they weren't so busy killing the Jews, they'd use Microsoft Word and a laser printer like good, god-fearing people. I can see how using the demonic mechanical type-o-tron would make her so uneasy...

Honestly, that whole passage is just pants-on-head retarded.

[Vector]

I think this lady is completely overstating the significance of the actual playing experience. It's almost insulting to the people who were there to suggest that a board game could somehow encapsulate the experience. I'll read a book on the holocaust if I want to fully appreciate the experience.

This comes off as being very pretentious...the shattered window had me rolling my eyes.

[Vector]

I don't pretend to gain any meaningful insight as to what it's truly like to live in the Ethiopian desert from Real Lives.

This kind of shit is, frankly, offensive as fuck in my book, to pretend at knowing a goddamn thing about what the people that went through it actually experienced, just because you played some artificially constructed and manipulated game scenario.

It, like similar projects that have come before it in the TRPG world, frankly come across as nothing so much as insulting to the people who actually suffered through such ordeals.

It's middle class boredom and liberal guilt coming together in the ultimate of pretentious twaddle.


I couldn't agree more with your post...

[Telefrog]

So the symbol of Nazi oppression was the evil Typewriter?!? Is the creator so young and sheltered that the only connection she can make with a typewriter are those horrible Nazis? I bet if they weren't so busy killing the Jews, they'd use Microsoft Word and a laser printer like good, god-fearing people. I can see how using the demonic mechanical type-o-tron would make her so uneasy...


I'm pretty sure she means that the typewriter as used in the context of the scenario is horrible. Seriously, the machinery of the Holocaust was diligent in record-keeping and reducing people to cold numbers on sheets of paper. People killed became "units processed" and concentration camps became "relocation centers."

I don't pretend to gain any meaningful insight as to what it's truly like to live in the Ethiopian desert from Real Lives.

This kind of shit is, frankly, offensive as fuck in my book, to pretend at knowing a goddamn thing about what the people that went through it actually experienced, just because you played some artificially constructed and manipulated game scenario.

It, like similar projects that have come before it in the TRPG world, frankly come across as nothing so much as insulting to the people who actually suffered through such ordeals.

It's middle class boredom and liberal guilt coming together in the ultimate of pretentious twaddle.

That's an interesting interpretation. I wonder if the Ethiopians find your intellectual/emotional disconnect during Real Lives as insulting?

When you play Train, you aren't pretending to be the Jew at all. You're (either purposefully or unwittingly) pretending to be the SS officer trying to get his train to the station on time. The empathy for the Jews in the scenario is based on the artifical construct that we've all been raised with. (As you said, unless you were there, what are you basing your reaction on?) Remember, the coldly impassionate goal in the example here is to move a gamepiece across a board. That in itself is no more exploitive or pretentious than moving a colored peg in Life or Candyland.

Edit: I think there's educational value here just in seeing people's reactions. Especially the ones that unwittingly played the game and didn't know the outcome. It's interesting to me to see how we all attach important emotional features to an artificial game that changes our whole outlook on the process even when the mechanics are the same.

[J Arcane]

You know what? I'm not taking the bait this time. I'm done being trolled, go find someone else.

I've made my opinions clear, and I don't feel like playing the dance where you twist my words and everything I've ever posted to keep your latest flamewar stoked as long as possible.

You don't get to have anymore of your fun at my expense.

[Telefrog]

I'll read a book on the holocaust if I want to fully appreciate the experience.

Sorry, Vector. I have to quote this. I find this kind of naivete charming. I doubt that any Survivors of The Holocaust would agree that reading a book will get you to "fully appreciate the experience."

[Vector]

That's an interesting interpretation. I wonder if the Ethiopians find your intellectual/emotional disconnect during Real Lives as insulting?.

Hopefully they would applaud his ability to differentiate between reality and some contrived exercise.

Could you imagine saying to someone "I understand slavery...I played the board game".

[Telefrog]

Hopefully they would applaud his ability to differentiate between reality and some contrived exercise.

Could you imagine saying to someone "I understand slavery...I played the board game".

Again, did anyone in the article, even the game designer, say that playing this game would ever convey the experience of The Holocaust?

I don't think reading a book, looking at pictures, playing a game, or even visiting a camp museum will convey the experience properly. I would hope however, that any tool (even *gasp* a game!) that helps people be more compassionate would be appreciated for what it is.

[Vector]

Sorry, Vector. I have to quote this. I find this kind of naivete charming. I doubt that any Survivors of The Holocaust would agree that rading a book will get you to "fully appreciate the experience."

Well the fact that you think a board game would convey the same level of information as a book is hardly charming. Then again ignorance isn't charming at all. :p

I'm sure Anne Frank would rather everyone play this game than read her book...because you know...the SS typewriter makes it so much more real.

I meant encapsulating the experience and the facts...

[alienmastermind]

That in itself is no more exploitive or pretentious than moving a colored peg in Life or Candyland.

Edit: I think there's educational value here just in seeing people's reactions. Especially the ones that unwittingly played the game and didn't know the outcome. It's interesting to me to see how we all attach important emotional features to an artificial game that changes our whole outlook on the process even when the mechanics are the same.

Okay.

I wouldn't play this game. The fact is, that I have very personal reasons to avoid this game, mainly because I believe that my family (those who did so) fought so that this shit wouldn't be done again. Even as an 'experiment' or just a mindfuck to shove people into remembering the Holocaust, or be aware of it, this is pretty shitty.

This reminds me of the diversity meeting I had at work. There was a game called 'Picnic'. The leader of the diversity training handed out 'random invitations' to a picnic. The rules on the invitations were 'bring something to the picnic', but the leader of the group could choose whether or not to bring you.

Each person said what they would bring, and nearly at random people were picked to go on the picnic. The rest were left behind. Then, we were told that some people got invitations that said 'The thing you should be bringing will begin with the first letter of your first name'. Most didn't get that inivitation.

When asked, the group had the typical responses to the question 'How did being excluded make you feel?'

'I felt left out' , 'I felt discriminated against'.

The lady gets to me and asked how I felt. I told the truth; I felt as though the rules weren't the same for everyone...and, the 'randomly distributed' 'real' invitations were not 'random'. Because the person distributing them knows that there are definitely some people going to be excluded.

So, what I felt was that this was endemic of our company's issue with systematic exclusion and then lying about it.

I didn't fail Diversity Training...but I'm sure that they weren't expecting the response.

This game has two endgames, actually, depending on what the rules are...If you're told the winner is the person who gets all the Jews to Auschwitz, who would play it? Who would even begin to fathom playing it? No one. You have to lie to them, which says something about the person making this experiment, not the people that were lied to and manipulated into playing. If you are actually aware of the rules, there are two winning scenarios: Either you get the Jews to Auschwitz, or you free them all.

Is this designed to make us feel bad for the SS fucks putting Jews on the trains?

Failed.

[Telefrog]

You know what? I'm not taking the bait this time. I'm done being trolled, go find someone else.

I've made my opinions clear, and I don't feel like playing the dance where you twist my words and everything I've ever posted to keep your latest flamewar stoked as long as possible.

You don't get to have anymore of your fun at my expense.

Peace, man. I'm geniunely interested in your reaction. Seriously. This isn't facetious or trolling.

Why are you able to play Real Lives, a "game" about roleplaying a person in which the usual result is diseased or violent death in third world poverty and find it engaging, but a boardgame about The Holocaust sets your emotional trigger off?

How is it different from (since we're in the analog games area) Squad Leader, a game that mimics the brutal and short lifespan of a normal soldier in MOUT warfare? Or even Chess which is an abstraction of war?

[Telefrog]

Well the fact that you think a board game would convey the same level of information as a book is hardly charming. Then again ignorance isn't charming at all. :p

I'm sure Anne Frank would rather everyone play this game than read her book...because you know...the SS typewriter makes it so much more real.

I meant encapsulating the experience and the facts...

See? Now this is interesting discussion!

So, then to you a game inherently holds less "serious" emotional worth than a book, yes? After all, I'm reading what you've posted as saying "no game can possibly ever convey as much as the written word." Is that correct?

While I agree to that basic statement at this time, I wonder if future generations will feel the same? Perhaps the technique just hasn't evolved enough? Is it just not viable to explore that avenue, or will games always be a ghetto in educational or emotional worth?

[alienmastermind]

Telefrog, wouldn't you hope that any 'message' you're given is based on truth? This is clearly based on deceiving the players. When you lie, even with the best intentions, is that morally correct? If you feel that the ends justifies the means, then you can begin to debate the horrible and insane acts of the Nazis in their 'Final Solution' as population control.

Any message I take from this will begin with: This was emotional blackmail. Now, what do I think of it?

It's the boardgame equivalent of watching someone eat a sloppy joe, and waiting until the end to tell them it was made of ground up people to make them aware of cannibalism. I find its usefulness dubious, to say the least.

[J Arcane]

It's really very simple, and is best explained with a personal truth:

I cannot imagine what it would be like to go through something like the Holocaust.

I don't have the experience, I don't have the psychological history, my circumstances are so far removed from that time and place, that the best I can get is asking the people who were there what they felt, and to fall back on the basic moral compass that tells me what happened was wrong and the obvious observation that such a thing would be incredibly painful and difficult.

But when we play a game, especially one like a board game or a TRPG, all we have is our imaginations. The limits of our imagination are exactly the limit of the "experience" represented by the game. My inability to truly imagine what it was like doesn't go away, it informs my reactions and my mental picture of the exercise. This is not reality, but at best, the crude version of it that my limited experience and imagination can muster, and I would never presume to suggest it was anything more than that. There's nothing here I didn't already bring to the table before the whole thing even began.

For me to suggest otherwise, to suggest I "learned" anything about myself or the experiences of others from this exercise, to suggest that I "understand" what these people went through, what it was like to be there, is obscene. It is trivializing, it is marginalizing, it is insulting, it is dishonest, disingenuous, and utterly, and completely, pretentious. To suggest that what I could experience engaging in an abstract pursuit performed in the comfort of a classroom with a bunch of other sheltered white folks whose idea of suffering is missing lunch is in any way meaningfully analogous to the real experience, should be completely and utterly ridiculous on it's face to anyone with the slightest lick of sense.

[alienmastermind]

To suggest that what I could experience engaging in an abstract pursuit performed in the comfort of a classroom with a bunch of other sheltered white folks whose idea of suffering is missing lunch is in any way meaningfully analogous to the real experience, should be completely and utterly ridiculous on it's face to anyone with the slightest lick of sense.

I watched the video of the lady explaining herself at the website J, and my wife asked what I was watching.

I explained it to her.

She said the same thing you did.

Only, she said 'That's the dumbest idea I've ever heard...what would you learn other than to not trust this bitch?'

Ah, my wife. I think I'll keep her. :D

(That was a joke, feminists...please don't cut off my nads)

[Vector]

I'd say it's safe to say this game won't be selling well here and for good reason.

[alienmastermind]

Snippet from the video that caught my attention: 'A rabbi came up to my table, where the game was and said 'I don't need to play this. I already know.'' The smug look on the lady's face made me want to shout at my computer.

Didn't she understand how offensive this was?

Who knows.

[Food Nipple]

I think that even if the group of players knew the outcome, there would still be some value from observing the session. Would a CoG "gamer" crowd not care about the fluff and still try to beat the game? After all, getting a BJ from a hooker in GTA or absorbing a civilian in Prototype is just a game mechanic for a health powerup, right?

That would be me. I don't care about the story in 90% of games, and I especially don't care about it when the author is trying to make a moral statement.

To paraphrase Shawn Elliott: You could try to make a minature golf course with an anti-abortion message, but it wouldn't make putting any more fun, and no one would want to play it.

[mister slim]

It's always funny to me how quickly people flip out once something becomes too real for them. I mean, dead hookers are always hilarious but roleplaying a German bureaucrat crosses the line.

[J Arcane]

It's always funny to me how quickly people flip out once something becomes too real for them. I mean, dead hookers are always hilarious but roleplaying a German bureaucrat crosses the line.
Forgive me for not subscribing to the 4chan generation's belief that any boundary of propriety whatsoever is unacceptable.

For the rest of us grownups, the existence of some form of line beyond which polite society generally does not cross, is not the slightest bit odd or out od the ordinary.

[Vyzov]

Why are you able to play Real Lives, a "game" about roleplaying a person in which the usual result is diseased or violent death in third world poverty

This never happens to me. No matter where my character ended up being born, I'd stay there for their entire lives and end up a huge success dying at like the ripe old age of 70-80

I had a chinese political/human rights activist live until he was 92!

[Ondo]

When asked about negative reactions in the article, she says:
There have been some strong reactions purely based on the subject matter and the medium, but those generally dissipate when people hear about the series overall, as well as the design of the game.
Has anyone else here heard about the series overall, or the design of the game?

I'd say it's safe to say this game won't be selling well here and for good reason.
Only one copy was ever made, and it's not for sale.

So the symbol of Nazi oppression was the evil Typewriter?!?
The power of the symbol is not in it being a typewriter, but that it was actually used by the motherfucking SS.

It's almost insulting to the people who were there to suggest that a board game could somehow encapsulate the experience. I'll read a book on the holocaust if I want to fully appreciate the experience.
I haven't seen her claim the game "encapsulated the experience", only that it could help people understand it. You, however, claim that reading a book will let you "fully appreciate the experience", which is insulting to the people who were there.

But when we play a game, especially one like a board game or a TRPG, all we have is our imaginations. The limits of our imagination are exactly the limit of the "experience" represented by the game. My inability to truly imagine what it was like doesn't go away, it informs my reactions and my mental picture of the exercise. This is not reality, but at best, the crude version of it that my limited experience and imagination can muster, and I would never presume to suggest it was anything more than that. There's nothing here I didn't already bring to the table before the whole thing even began.
I disagree - there's more than just your imagination and what you bring to the table, there's the game and its mechanics. That's what she's trying to communicate with - "The Mechanic is the Message" is the name of the series. I'm not convinced Train succeeds at this - most of what I've heard about it is about the physical pieces, symbols that mean nothing if you don't recognize them - but other games in the series sound like they do, and certainly I'm not willing to dismiss the idea that it is possible for a game to do so.

Telefrog, wouldn't you hope that any 'message' you're given is based on truth? This is clearly based on deceiving the players. When you lie, even with the best intentions, is that morally correct?
At least one interpretation of Train's message was that it was about "the drive for efficiency that obscures the ethics of one’s action." How could that be delivered in a more honest way? And note that Train does not lie - it leaves out vital information, but the symbolism seems designed to make it obvious.

[Wolvie]

If I figured out what this game was about before I got to the end? I'd quit, then get up and leave. If I didn't figure out what it was by the time it was over, I'd be pissed.

So with my current knowledge of this game, hell no I wouldn't play it.

[Hawkzombie]

At least one interpretation of Train's message was that it was about "the drive for efficiency that obscures the ethics of one’s action." How could that be delivered in a more honest way? And note that Train does not lie - it leaves out vital information, but the symbolism seems designed to make it obvious.

That's just it: not telling the whole truth is itself a form of lying.

If I were presented this game with no back story, I honestly wouldn't know (initially) it was about the holocaust. Just some 'art' game with a weird board (the broken window)...as the game progressed and I truly realized what it was, I wouldn't try and 'stop the other players' I'd tell them 'Jesus Christ we're killing Jews' and just leave.

Games that educate can do so and be enjoyable. We don't need something like this to create discourse on the atrocities of the holocaust...because the very nature of the game is to create discourse about itself.

Another truth conveniently left out. If we zoom out, she doesn't care about the holocaust, or educating people about it in a way that screams for people to talk about it...she wants people to talk about her game, and the way she's made it. The smug look to the rabbi's comment almost proves that IMO.


One person mentioned how it's somehow deplorable to be a part of the Nazi Germany Bureaucracy, but somehow ok and fun to kill hookers in another game. We're not playing Grand Theft Auschwitz, or Hookercaust...We're playing a game that allows bad things to happen because we play bad guys. It's not acceptable generally, but it's palpable. Genocide generally isn't a theme you'll find in most games.

I'm leaning more towards agreeing with J Arcane and alienmastermind...The game isn't something that will educate, not by a long shot.

[KamaItachi]

Telefrog, wouldn't you hope that any 'message' you're given is based on truth? This is clearly based on deceiving the players. When you lie, even with the best intentions, is that morally correct? If you feel that the ends justifies the means, then you can begin to debate the horrible and insane acts of the Nazis in their 'Final Solution' as population control.

Any message I take from this will begin with: This was emotional blackmail. Now, what do I think of it?

It's the boardgame equivalent of watching someone eat a sloppy joe, and waiting until the end to tell them it was made of ground up people to make them aware of cannibalism. I find its usefulness dubious, to say the least.

This is pretty much what I took from reading the description of the game and the recounting of the reactions. The game in and of itself doesn't bring anything new to the table or, merely exploit an atrocity for the sake of 'social conscience'

[Telefrog]

At least one interpretation of Train's message was that it was about "the drive for efficiency that obscures the ethics of one’s action." How could that be delivered in a more honest way? And note that Train does not lie - it leaves out vital information, but the symbolism seems designed to make it obvious.

I think this is very much the point.

Many of you seem to be missing the forest for the trees or at least ascribing a meaning to the game that no one, not even the designer, said was there. I think Ondo is the first one to actually pay attention to what was going on in the article. People will automatically empathize with the Jews because that's what we've been taught to do. This game puts them in the shoes of the functionary that was complicit in the act of genocide - a situation most of us are taught never to empathize with.

Everyone keeps missing the fact that hundreds of thousands of people in Germany took part in a daily abstraction (similar to Train) that allowed them to take part in the systematic killing of millions of people. Every single day during The Holocaust there were linemen, conductors, maintenance men, schedulers, and others that ensured the smooth and efficient operation of these murderous trains.

We can all easily sit here in our comfortable internet newsfed homes and emphatically proclaim that we obviously would never take part in any such abomination. Of course we wouldn't help schedule and run trains that carried human cargo to their deaths! Yet, somehow many decent human beings did just that. How? Why?

Train, I think, gives a good view into that behavioral mindset. It's a task to be accomplished. An abstract exercise of shuffling figures in a ledger. Dots on a map. It made the unthinkable into the mundane.

Yes, there was deception or omission in the inital stages of the game! How else would you get people to experience the lesson? People in this decade, removed from the circumstances of the War and the prejudices of that time period, can all too easily refuse to play. If they don't participate, then the lesson goes unlearned.

As for those of you that say the designer is a pretentious jerk, well maybe she is. I think for the purposes of this discussion, we can dismiss her personality faults and concentrate on the product. Most of us have no issues with playing games designed and produced by egotistical or pretentious personalities. (See the thread on Braid for an example.)

[Ondo]

I think Ondo is the first one to actually pay attention to what was going on in the article.
Thanks, but it wasn't the article - I've been reading Brenda Brathwaite's blog, Applied Game Design (http://bbrathwaite.wordpress.com/), for a long time, and heard about Train long ago - after hearing about the series it's part of, which does help to give some perspective.

In general, I don't rely on the Wall Street Journal for accurate game news. Unsurprisingly, they seem to be picking the most sensational parts to report on.

[J Arcane]

I disagree - there's more than just your imagination and what you bring to the table, there's the game and its mechanics. That's what she's trying to communicate with - "The Mechanic is the Message" is the name of the series. I'm not convinced Train succeeds at this - most of what I've heard about it is about the physical pieces, symbols that mean nothing if you don't recognize them - but other games in the series sound like they do, and certainly I'm not willing to dismiss the idea that it is possible for a game to do so.

A game's mechanics tell my nothing. System Doesn't Matter, as the saying goes. They are an impassive abstraction, a bunch of lines of code, essentially, that can reflect or teach nothing in themselves, but instead serve only to reflect the limited imagination and biases of it's author.

Even if your excuse were correct, which I don't believe in the least, it only offloads the blame from the players to the creator, which is something I would've done anyway really, because it was her brilliant idea to make a game out of lining up Jews on a train to be slaughtered.

The system is limited by it's creator, and something tells me it's creator wasn't an Auschwitz survivor or an SS officer either.

[BLeeP]

Everyone keeps missing the fact that hundreds of thousands of people in Germany took part in a daily abstraction (similar to Train) that allowed them to take part in the systematic killing of millions of people. Every single day during The Holocaust there were linemen, conductors, maintenance men, schedulers, and others that ensured the smooth and efficient operation of these murderous trains.

We can all easily sit here in our comfortable internet newsfed homes and emphatically proclaim that we obviously would never take part in any such abomination. Of course we wouldn't help schedule and run trains that carried human cargo to their deaths! Yet, somehow many decent human beings did just that. How? Why?

Train, I think, gives a good view into that behavioral mindset. It's a task to be accomplished. An abstract exercise of shuffling figures in a ledger. Dots on a map. It made the unthinkable into the mundane.

Yes, there was deception or omission in the inital stages of the game! How else would you get people to experience the lesson? People in this decade, removed from the circumstances of the War and the prejudices of that time period, can all too easily refuse to play. If they don't participate, then the lesson goes unlearned.

This is what I felt the point of the game was. I didn't watch any videos of the designer or anything, but the idea and description seemed less about what happened in the Holocaust, but a lot more about how it was allowed to happen. Hindsight is 20/20, and you can see that a lot in the way Germany extremely handles some things now, but I would like to think the majority of people involved in these day to day operations were "tricked" (not told vital information) and weren't 100 percent sure what they were doing. Like I said, I didn't read what she had to say, nor did I watch videos of her talking about it, but I feel that this here is the much more important angle to look at this social experiment in.

[Ondo]

A game's mechanics tell my nothing. System Doesn't Matter, as the saying goes.
I've never seen that saying pass without an argument. Of course system matters. Call of Cthulhu and D&D 4e are very different.

They are an impassive abstraction, a bunch of lines of code, essentially, that can reflect or teach nothing in themselves, but instead serve only to reflect the limited imagination and biases of it's author.
Honestly, I simply have no idea why you would think this. Of course lines of code, and rules, can reflect and teach things - they're designed by people, and, yes, reflect the author's intent.

The system is limited by it's creator
Well no shit. So what? All art is limited by its creator - we don't demand that only Auschwitz survivors or SS officers write books or make movies dealing with the Holocaust.

[mister slim]

Forgive me for not subscribing to the 4chan generation's belief that any boundary of propriety whatsoever is unacceptable.

For the rest of us grownups, the existence of some form of line beyond which polite society generally does not cross, is not the slightest bit odd or out od the ordinary.

Yes, it's easier to just think the Holocaust/Rwanda/Armenia only happened because every German/Hutu/Ottoman was evil, rather than understanding and addressing the entire system. It's also completely ineffective. Though you can sleep well at night, knowing you've never, say, contributed to the death of an entire wedding party to a misdirected missile. Check out the Milgram experiment sometime.

That's just it: not telling the whole truth is itself a form of lying.

Games lie constantly. There's the narrative twist, like Kotor, Final Fantasy VII, or the Ultima where the player slaughters gargoyles. But on a deeper level, games are about learning the deeper implications of the game's surface mechanics, like casting a heal spell on a vampire or taking advantage of damage immunity during a dodge roll. The game presents the basic verbs, 'A Button jumps' or 'Right Trigger shoots' or whatever, but the player has to figure out what it actually means in the gameworld. Loov at how much Mario 3 gets out of a d-pad and two buttons.

If I were presented this game with no back story, I honestly wouldn't know (initially) it was about the holocaust. Just some 'art' game with a weird board (the broken window)...as the game progressed and I truly realized what it was, I wouldn't try and 'stop the other players' I'd tell them 'Jesus Christ we're killing Jews' and just leave.

You'd just walk of and abandon the cargo on your cattle train to die? No attempt at a rescue?

I think the game makes an interesting point about how easy it is to rationalize an action if it's less dangerous and we don't have all the necessary information. A predator drone flash game could be pretty interesting. Sure, it's easy to target the house where Osama Bin Laden is, but what if it's the real world where you don't know if he's still there or ever really was.

[alienmastermind]

Yes, it's easier to just think the Holocaust/Rwanda/Armenia only happened because every German/Hutu/Ottoman was evil, rather than understanding and addressing the entire system.

Okay, but there's a better way of explaining those vagaries without emotional blackmail or outright lying to the players.

Do you remember that PBS special about the woman during the 60s who told her 2nd grade class that blue eyed children were better than brown eyed children for a day, and watched as the blue eyed kids devolved into monsters against the brown eyed kids...to teach them about racial intolerance?

That experiment, in my opinion, teaches children to distrust those who claim authority. She lied to those kids, and was uniquely able to do so because of her position of authority. They would follow what she said, because teacher wouldn't lie to us.

If this, again, is the message...that we cannot trust leadership, that the 'metagame' is more important than our own individuality, I disagree with that too.

I understand the need to force understanding when you believe the world to be ignorant, or to force empathy, because you believe you know best. I get it that some people around here feel that this visceral experiment is going to be the only way we'd understand unless we were there. But a rabbi came over and saw what this was immediately. They didn't need a game to preach to them. They understood. And I wonder if they weren't offended.

But again, if you're asking me to empathize not with the people being put on the trains but the people who were complicit in those murders? Again, it's a failure. Because once you know what's happening you wouldn't do it. Which is why there's a visceral reaction at the end when the 'surprise' happens. Because NOW people aren't able to conceive of such evil behavior, and you would have to continue to disillusion them, to continue to decieve them to get them to 'play'.

The ends never justify evil means. Which this game teaches in the most ass-backward way possible. By itself being something evil. I mean the woman wrote the instructions on an SS typewriter. Where the eff did she get one of those? They don't sell them at Woolworth's far as I know. You have to be a collector. It seems to fetishize this misery, rather than view it as an object lesson in the dangers of the cult of personality. I vacillate between thinking the metagame is something an LSD-tripping person would come up with to be a good launching point for discussion, and thinking this woman might be insane.

I can see why people would defend this game as a way to bite people in the ass and shake up conventional thought regarding the 1940s German populace. Because accepting human nature is difficult, and this game will make that sickened feeling in the pit of thinking people's stomachs spread to people the creator of the game assumes are 'ignorant'.

Who are we to question the understanding of every person on the planet, or force our unique perspectives on them? That's the real hoot, here, is this is just the totalitarianism of perception, rather than allowing people to have their own conclusions about the events of the Holocaust.

Like I said in my earlier post, I have personal reasons not to want to play this game. My family is primarily German/American. We know what we're supposed to feel about this; we changed the spelling of our last name in '46 to be MORE American than German. When my great-uncles went off to war, they had family here that were 1 generation off the boats who told them who they would be fighting...That it could be our family they're going to kill.

My uncle Henry said, 'Our family knows better than to put on that uniform and fight us. If they don't, then they were never our family to begin with.'

My uncle Henry made it home at somewhere around D-Day +30 or so, after being wounded. His brothers were in the Pacific, and one made it back. My uncle Henry had the moment in his actual life where he was told why the trains were running on time, and why people didn't go to certain parts of the city. As a German-American...what do you think he did? How do you think he felt the first time he saw a camp?

How did I feel, when I lived in Germany, and my dad brought us to a camp to show us?

Believe me, I don't need a game to understand that sometimes the world is a mad place. This woman's intentions are probably to stab people with this information, the meta-game here is only useful as a weapon, not a tool. And you cannot force people to feel empathy.

[Ink Asylum]

Telefrog nailed it. I don't have much to add to it.

You could write a book or movie that explores the same idea as this game and tries to trick the reader/viewer by withholding or changing identifying information about the germans and nazis and explores the daily life of a worker who was unaware of what they were really doing during the holocaust but gradually figured it out and explores their reaction. Done well, it could be an amazing experience.

We've had a game recently that played with a similar concept, Shadow of the Colossus, and everyone lauded it for how halfway through the game they began to realize the horror of what they were doing yet they keep playing because it's what you do in a game.

I believe games are entirely capable of exploring the Holocaust with the same respect that books and movies give to the topic. Like books and movies, no one is saying that they are anyway equivalent to actually going through the Holocaust, they are just meant to give viewers or readers or players one tenth, or one thousandth of that feeling, so they can better understand what happened.

[alienmastermind]

I believe games are entirely capable of exploring the Holocaust with the same respect that books and movies give to the topic. Like books and movies, no one is saying that they are anyway equivalent to actually going through the Holocaust, they are just meant to give viewers or readers or players one tenth, or one thousandth of that feeling, so they can better understand what happened.

I agree with you.

Would you say that knowing the book and movie you're about to absorb is a roman a clef for the Holocaust, or an actual close-to-real portrayal is important?

In other words, is telling your audience the truth important when talking about the Holocaust?

[Vector]

Only one copy was ever made, and it's not for sale..

I was being facetious...I thought that was obvious but oh well.

I haven't seen her claim the game "encapsulated the experience", only that it could help people understand it. You, however, claim that reading a book will let you "fully appreciate the experience", which is insulting to the people who were there..

Other than being there name a better way to understand it? You do realize why books are so popular historically, right? Are you honestly suggesting that a board game and a 3000 page book chronicling the Holocaust are equal in terms of conveying the facts?????

[Ondo]

Other than being there name a better way to understand it? You do realize why books are so popular historically, right? Are you honestly suggesting that a board game and a 3000 page book chronicling the Holocaust are equal in terms of conveying the facts?????
No, I'm saying reading a book is not good enough to "fully appreciate the experience". Nothing is.

[Vector]

No, I'm saying reading a book is not good enough to "fully appreciate the experience". Nothing is.

That was a poor choice of words on my behalf but I clarified that in a later post.

[Ink Asylum]

Would you say that knowing the book and movie you're about to absorb is a roman a clef for the Holocaust, or an actual close-to-real portrayal is important?

In other words, is telling your audience the truth important when talking about the Holocaust?

Telling people in advance reduces the impact, in my opinion. Once people know something is about the Holocaust it instantly flavors their view on whatever they're seeing.

We can look back now after the fact and know the true and complete horrors of the Holocaust but, as others have pointed out, during the war very few people knew what was actually happening and an even smaller number knew the full picture.

If you're going to try to simulate that experience you can't tell people in advance that they're doing something related to the Holocaust.

[Vector]

Besides all that the motivation behind this game is different than what really happened. This lady has confused two completely different elements of psychology. Games are about competition, reward and winning. Experiments decades ago showed that the use of authority and "experts"(Milgram Experiment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment)) is what caused so many to ignore their conscious during atrocities like the holocaust. Gamers don't care if the mechanics of the game are filing taxes...if there's a winner at the end they will play all night to see who is the best.

It's silly to suggest that playing this game is in anyway analogous to the decision making process of those who actually loaded the train cars. It's a strained analogy and insulting.

[alienmastermind]

Telling people in advance reduces the impact, in my opinion. Once people know something is about the Holocaust it instantly flavors their view on whatever they're seeing.

And that, Ink, is my point. People know what they feel about the Holocaust, and the game itself is designed to have people participate, unwittingly, in that global horror...to what end, though?

Like I said earlier, playing this game and knowing what it is about is trivializing the events. I wouldn't participate, especially now that I know what's going on. Playing this game without knowing the true message of the game is emotional blackmail. It makes you feel terrible, because you are now complicit in something that you would otherwise have never done.

That feeling of horror at knowing what this is about is good, because inherently we abhor genocide, and we're willing to say 'Never Again'. It's somewhat like the movie 'The Passion of the Christ'. It places in your hand the hammer and nails, makes you feel the death of Christ, and reinforces the brutal truth that his torture was for your benefit. The guilt trip there is insanely effective and powerful.

We can look back now after the fact and know the true and complete horrors of the Holocaust but, as others have pointed out, during the war very few people knew what was actually happening and an even smaller number knew the full picture.

If you're going to try to simulate that experience you can't tell people in advance that they're doing something related to the Holocaust.

Well, okay. But do you think that simulating this experience is beneficial?

[Telefrog]

Gamers don't care if the mechanics of the game are filing taxes...if there's a winner at the end they will play all night to see who is the best.

I disagree. We have examples right in this thread of gamers that have said they would never play this game. Obviously, dressing the game a certain way does, in fact, influence people on whether or not they want to play, even if the mechanics are functionally the same as another game.

It's silly to suggest that playing this game is in anyway analogous to the decision making process of those who actually loaded the train cars. It's a strained analogy and insulting.

The game series is Games for Change. The conclusion you should draw from this game isn't that managing the logistics of The Holocaust was hard, it's that this is how atrocities are managed by normal people all the time - even now. The logistics of genocide is a puzzle that normal everyday people help to solve thoughout the world. Why? How do they do it? Normal people seem repulsed by the task when faced with it, but apparently if the situation was changed, they have no problem doing it.

Using the Holocaust is a blunt tool that makes the lesson universal to most people. Change the game's setting and fluff to whatever suits you. Pushing Tutsis onto "relocation" trucks. Cramming Kurds into "refugee" convoys. Obviously, any modern situation could've been used, but then current prejudices might color a person's experience. (After all, if you're sympathetic to the Hutu effort, you may not care about Tutsis. Even worse, you may just be a normal US citizen and not give a damn anyway because it doesn't effect you.) The Holocaust is an almost universal example.

---------

By the way, I wanted to say that I appreciate everyone's participation so far. This thread certainly had the chance of spiraling out of control, but I think we're having a really good discussion about it. Thank you!

[alienmastermind]

You know TF, I'd be curious as to what you think of this game (http://www.columbinegame.com/).

[Ink Asylum]

And that, Ink, is my point. People know what they feel about the Holocaust, and the game itself is designed to have people participate, unwittingly, in that global horror...to what end, though?

Well, okay. But do you think that simulating this experience is beneficial?

Most people know about the Holocaust from reading about it in history books or other second hand information. In another ten to twenty years there will be little to no people with first hand experience of the Holocaust. In another fifty years there will be next to no one who was even alive during it.

Is it enough just to read the facts and figures, to watch movies and talk about it? Is that enough to get the lessons across to make sure the next generation doesn't fall victim to the same mentality that allowed it to happen?

I think we do need experiences that allow people to more directly engage in the feelings and mindsets of people during the Holocaust, both the victims and the citizens of Germany that ignored what was happening around them. Those experiences are more effective if people aren't warned in advance that they're simulating the rise of Nazism and the Holocaust.

[Arphahat]

At most, what comes across to me is that the subject matter is a bad marketing decision. If the game is fun until the sudden reveal at the end, why not alter the concept? Instead of moving Jews to Auschwitz, why not have it be animals to the zoo, or food/goods to market?

I understand she is trying to make a point and isn't trying to sell the game at all and it isn't her goal. My point is, the subject matter of the game isn't what makes a game fun or not; most often it is the gameplay itself.

[Vector]

I disagree. We have examples right in this thread of gamers that have said they would never play this game. Obviously, dressing the game a certain way does, in fact, influence people on whether or not they want to play, even if the mechanics are functionally the same as another game

I know people who won't play COD because it involves killing...that hardly means that IW has made some worthwhile contribution to psychology and our understanding of combat.

Not everyone likes the same games and not everyone likes games with mature themes or violence.

[mister slim]

I know people who won't play COD because it involves killing...that hardly means that IW has made some worthwhile contribution to psychology and our understanding of combat.

Not everyone likes the same games and not everyone likes games with mature themes or violence.

Modern Warfare 2 is adding in civilians, though Infinity Ward hasn't really discussed how they're handling them. Probably if you shoot a non-combatant you get sent back to the last checkpoint. There should be some interesting reactions to the ability to kill innocents however they handle it.

[Telefrog]

You know TF, I'd be curious as to what you think of this game (http://www.columbinegame.com/).

I was actually waiting for someone to bring this up.

Super Columbine Massacre, despite the creator's revisionist statement (http://www.columbinegame.com/statement.htm), did not start as a lesson to be learned. Danny Ledonne stumbled into what was eventually to become an industry lightning rod.

I'll take my own advice and divorce the creation from the creator. Let's just look at the game. (Yes, I've played it.)

I didn't really see much of a lesson or message there. You take the role of Klebold and Harris. Various school bullies and antagonists come at you and you "shoot" at them in a RPG mechanic. Unfortunately, the game is filled with inaccuracies about the shooting, such as confusing the identity of the "Do you believe in God?" girl (a mistake a lot of media made) and even delves into a strange fantasy section towards the end involving Satan, Ronald Reagan, and JonBenet Ramsey. It's confusing and anticlimatic. If there's a lesson to be learned it's lost in the perspective of being two crazed, and self-pitying, losers.

If Ledonne really wanted to make a game exploring how someone could be driven to that state of mind, he should've either placed the player in the shoes of the bullies or the killers before the massacre. Also, as we've discussed, it's hard for any sane player to go into the exercise with any feelings of empathy for Klebold and Harris because we're already aware of the real incident and it's outcome. Most of us know what it was like to be bullied at some point in our lives, and we didn't spiral into a rage induced massacre. It's too easy to dismiss the perspective and say, "Well, they did it because they're crazy." In fact, the game pretty much reinforces the point with the zaniness of the last section.

I think the strength of Train comes from the fact that it's so simple in design that it undermines the expectations of the player. Why wouldn't you play a competitive version of Chutes 'N Ladders? It's fun and engaging until the reveal, then you realize how wrong it is to play. You are placed in the shoes of someone who completed an abstract task without thinking of the consequences.

[Banacek]

I'll play this once the Jewish Brigade expansion comes out.

[violent]

Broken window board, typed with an SS era typewriter, and social experimentation. The real question is whether this is nothing more than pretentious drivel or a tragic commentary on peoples inability to respect history without it being delivered in a form of the seemingly enjoyable?

[Heretic Machine]

I'm of the opinion that game design, as an art, should get it's point across through game mechanics rather than hamfisting screen writing or cinematography into the mix as we see so many video games doing today. Now, this is a board game, so the fluff would be different here regardless, but still I'm curious as to whether or not the mechanics of the game convey the message (whatever that might be; holocaust = bad, maybe), or if the fluff of having the train and the little yellow people in the cars is what carries it along. Without playing it myself, I really can't say.

Would the game be as effective in it's portrayal of the holocaust if there were simply two little cardboard boxes and a bunch of marbles instead of a train and people? That would be the test for me.

[ShivaX]

So wait... the game is about loading lots of people into boxcars and some people didn't immediately think of the Holocaust? If I put one person in a box car, it might be a hobo or something. Once I'm stacking piles of them in, theres not many scenarios where I'm not taking people to a concentration camp.

That said, I'd probably play to win if I had to play. I don't see how this raises any awareness at all. Its a fricken game with little toy trains. If you want to raise awareness theres plenty of footage/photos of the actual camps out there.

[SilentScreams]

I would play and I would try to win. If I win I don't think I'll have any kind of guilt trip over sending my little wooden toys to a make believe concentration camp.
Frankly the significance of this game is completely lost on me. I think it probably only really works if you have some kind of emotional connection to the Holocaust.

[TheKeck]

I think it probably only really works if you have some kind of emotional connection to the Holocaust.
Wow .

[Vector]

Wow .

There's nothing wow about his comment...the game itself is such an abstract concept that I doubt anyone will play it and then tear up when they realize what's going on.

I cry everytime I watch Schindler's List but even I rolled my eyes at this game...wow?

[TheKeck]

There's nothing wow about his comment...the game itself is such an abstract concept that I doubt anyone will play it and then tear up when they realize what's going on.

I cry everytime I watch Schindler's List but even I rolled my eyes at this game...wow?
You tear up when you watch Schindler's List? How odd. I would think that probably only really works if you have some kind of emotional connection to the Holocaust.

[SilentScreams]

I fail to see what was so "wow" about my comment.

[TheKeck]

Do most people not "have some kind of emotional connection to the Holocaust"? Maybe you do need to play this game.

[SilentScreams]

I wasn't alive when it happened. I'm not Jewish. I don't know anybody Jewish. I can't even name anybody Jewish without looking it up. It's safe to say I have no emotional connection to the Holocaust whatsoever.

It was a terrible thing, no doubt about that. But on a personal level, I've never felt any kind of emotion about it.

[TheKeck]

I wasn't alive when it happened. I'm not Jewish. I don't know anybody Jewish. I can't even name anybody Jewish without looking it up. It's safe to say I have no emotional connection to the Holocaust whatsoever.

It was a terrible thing, no doubt about that. But on a personal level, I've never felt any kind of emotion about it.
And this is what is shocking to me. No need to defend yourself or anything. I just find that truly amazing.

[TrackZero]

You know what? I'm not taking the bait this time. I'm done being trolled, go find someone else.

I've made my opinions clear, and I don't feel like playing the dance where you twist my words and everything I've ever posted to keep your latest flamewar stoked as long as possible.

You don't get to have anymore of your fun at my expense.

Dude, get off your high horse. I came into this thread interested what reading what CoGers would think about this game (I already knew about it before). And you go off on some soapbox rant that is completely blown out of proportion. Then you accuse Telefrog of trolling for making quite reasonable, calm statements giving another perspective.

It's a game, which can have interesting consequences to some people as they realize what the game is. That's it. It's not trying to be some singular tailsman focus for everything that happened in the concentration camps. It's just an educational tool. That's it. If you can't handle that, I suggest you go take a time out.

[J Arcane]

Dude, get off your high horse. I came into this thread interested what reading what CoGers would think about this game (I already knew about it before). And you go off on some soapbox rant that is completely blown out of proportion. Then you accuse Telefrog of trolling for making quite reasonable, calm statements giving another perspective.

It's a game, which can have interesting consequences to some people as they realize what the game is. That's it. It's not trying to be some singular tailsman focus for everything that happened in the concentration camps. It's just an educational tool. That's it. If you can't handle that, I suggest you go take a time out.
I made a calm decision to ignore a line of questioning that was bound to get my blood pressure higher than I felt like being that day, and made it plain to the questioner that he need not waste my or his time.

And for that I get shit from a mod?

This place is starting to remind me a little too much of RPGnet. If you people are gearing up to start with the legislation of politeness, or just aching for a ban, please, be open about it at least. I'm getting a little tired of the push towards passive aggressiveness I've been seeing lately.

[Vector]

You tear up when you watch Schindler's List? How odd. I would think that probably only really works if you have some kind of emotional connection to the Holocaust.

You need help

[mister slim]

You need help

That's not much of a counter-argument.

Personally I never found Schindler's List that emotionally moving. It was beautifully shot, but the overt attempts to manipulate the audience put me off. The game visitors to the Holocaust Museum play is much more effective at communicating how horrible the Third Reich was.

[Vector]

That's not much of a counter-argument.

Personally I never found Schindler's List that emotionally moving. It was beautifully shot, but the overt attempts to manipulate the audience put me off. The game visitors to the Holocaust Museum play is much more effective at communicating how horrible the Third Reich was.

I think you forgot to make your post pink denoting supreme sarcasm. :p

I once met a guy who thought Platoon wasn't emotionally moving either...I no longer underestimate how cold and emotionally detached some people are.

Not much of a counter argument? Do I really even need to address why a film and a board game are in different dimensions when it comes to reproducing a historical event? Really?

[TheKeck]

You need help
I'm confused, what is it I need help with?

(Aside from understanding that statement, I mean.)

[Clark]

You need help

He was being sarcastic and trying to explain his position.

"You need help." How does that strengthen yours?

[TheKeck]

He was being sarcastic and trying to explain his position.

"You need help." How does that strengthen yours?
Thanks Clark. I think I edited in the appropriate color to my post.

[Lint of Death]

Well, this thread is a good read.
I hate the idea of putting things in terms of 'us vs them' but my thoughts are pretty much entirely in line with Telefrog, Ink Asylum, and Ondo. The message and point of this game is quite profound. Not only does it do an excellent job of trying to connect Nazi Germany with the idea that it was actually a country full of ordinary people, rather than demons, committing atrocities, but it's just so much broader. Not being told the destination of the trains until the end is perhaps the most important part, as that is the only way for the player to get the experience of being a cog in a mysterious machine. Being such a cog is such an easy thing to do and it can happen to anyone - I am certain that there are a lot of people in this world that are not paying attention to what they're doing and why.

To me, the more universal message of the game is clear: know what you are doing and why. Would I play the game? Being Jewish I would recognize this game for what it is immediately - granted the engineer in me loves making things efficient - but I would still play so that I could explore what the designer is trying to communicate and see what options are made available for working against the established goal.

And mechanics are art. Just look at the Sims series reeeaaaal close. It's supposed to be a sort of 'life-simulator', so few games are in such a strong position to make poignant statements. How are relationships built and destroyed? What does it take to succeed in a job? How does it handle love, and how has that changed with each iteration? But that's another thread entirely ;)