Board Game Controversy: GMT's "Scramble for Africa"

[Laika]

I saw a link to this on Christian forums and wondered what RF's take would be on the subject.

On April 7th, prominent publisher of board wargames GMT Games released a statement announcing that they’d pulled a game from their pre-order list: Scramble for Africa. The game, portraying the eponymous invasion of the African continent by European powers in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, seemed like one that portrayed the colonial period in Africa in a simplistic way, ultimately rewarding players for being the best at recreating a piece of history that included genocide in Namibia and mass enslavement in the Belgian Congo Free State. It had come under heavy critique from board gamers for, in the words of GMT’s own statement, “both topic and treatment” of its colonialist historical setting.

The company’s decision to pull the game fanned the flames of discussion in the relatively small board games community. While some praised GMT for the statement and decision, it infuriated others who saw the decision to pull the game as bowing to “politically correct” pressure or “erasing history.” Multi-page threads of arguing and insults saw BoardGameGeek moderators leaving whole strings of comments removed. When the game entry for Scramble for Africa was removed, those threads went to the entry for “Unpublished Prototype.” They’ve since drawn so much attention and commentary that Unpublished Prototype has shot to the top ranks of BoardGameGeek’s “The Hotness” list and stayed there all week.

Source: A Cancelled Board Game Revealed How Colonialism Inspires and Haunts Games - VICE
More Info: Should Board Gamers Play the Roles of Racists, Slavers and Nazis?

What do you make of the idea that certain subjects are too controversial to be made in to board games and what do you think it's implications are for gaming and society? Do you think the gaming company made the right decision to pull the game or not?

 

[Audie]

I saw a link to this on Christian forums and wondered what RF's take would be on the subject.

On April 7th, prominent publisher of board wargames GMT Games released a statement announcing that they’d pulled a game from their pre-order list: Scramble for Africa. The game, portraying the eponymous invasion of the African continent by European powers in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, seemed like one that portrayed the colonial period in Africa in a simplistic way, ultimately rewarding players for being the best at recreating a piece of history that included genocide in Namibia and mass enslavement in the Belgian Congo Free State. It had come under heavy critique from board gamers for, in the words of GMT’s own statement, “both topic and treatment” of its colonialist historical setting.

The company’s decision to pull the game fanned the flames of discussion in the relatively small board games community. While some praised GMT for the statement and decision, it infuriated others who saw the decision to pull the game as bowing to “politically correct” pressure or “erasing history.” Multi-page threads of arguing and insults saw BoardGameGeek moderators leaving whole strings of comments removed. When the game entry for Scramble for Africa was removed, those threads went to the entry for “Unpublished Prototype.” They’ve since drawn so much attention and commentary that Unpublished Prototype has shot to the top ranks of BoardGameGeek’s “The Hotness” list and stayed there all week.

Source: A Cancelled Board Game Revealed How Colonialism Inspires and Haunts Games - VICE
More Info: Should Board Gamers Play the Roles of Racists, Slavers and Nazis?

What do you make of the idea that certain subjects are too controversial to be made in to board games and what do you think it's implications are for gaming and society? Do you think the gaming company made the right decision to pull the game or not?

All controversy is bad. We must question nothing
and all think alike.

 

[Spirit of Light]

I saw a link to this on Christian forums and wondered what RF's take would be on the subject.

On April 7th, prominent publisher of board wargames GMT Games released a statement announcing that they’d pulled a game from their pre-order list: Scramble for Africa. The game, portraying the eponymous invasion of the African continent by European powers in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, seemed like one that portrayed the colonial period in Africa in a simplistic way, ultimately rewarding players for being the best at recreating a piece of history that included genocide in Namibia and mass enslavement in the Belgian Congo Free State. It had come under heavy critique from board gamers for, in the words of GMT’s own statement, “both topic and treatment” of its colonialist historical setting.

The company’s decision to pull the game fanned the flames of discussion in the relatively small board games community. While some praised GMT for the statement and decision, it infuriated others who saw the decision to pull the game as bowing to “politically correct” pressure or “erasing history.” Multi-page threads of arguing and insults saw BoardGameGeek moderators leaving whole strings of comments removed. When the game entry for Scramble for Africa was removed, those threads went to the entry for “Unpublished Prototype.” They’ve since drawn so much attention and commentary that Unpublished Prototype has shot to the top ranks of BoardGameGeek’s “The Hotness” list and stayed there all week.

Source: A Cancelled Board Game Revealed How Colonialism Inspires and Haunts Games - VICE
More Info: Should Board Gamers Play the Roles of Racists, Slavers and Nazis?

What do you make of the idea that certain subjects are too controversial to be made in to board games and what do you think it's implications are for gaming and society? Do you think the gaming company made the right decision to pull the game or not?

The company did the right thing to withdraw the games. Because why should we play a game that illustrates how the white man did treat Africa when the white man invaded their land? Why would we buy a game where someone earns money on history that shows how mad man can be?

 

[Laika]

The company did the right thing to withdraw the games. Because why should we play a game that illustrates how the white man did treat Africa when the white man invaded their land? Why would we buy a game where someone earns money on history that shows how mad man can be?

Do you think that is a legitimate reason for you not to buy the game or for the company not to make it in the first place?

 

[Eddi]

poor taste and poor judgment on the part of the publisher

 

[Spirit of Light]

Do you think that is a legitimate reason for you not to buy the game or for the company not to make it in the first place?

If the game was sold i would not buy it.

 

[Stevicus]

I saw a link to this on Christian forums and wondered what RF's take would be on the subject.

On April 7th, prominent publisher of board wargames GMT Games released a statement announcing that they’d pulled a game from their pre-order list: Scramble for Africa. The game, portraying the eponymous invasion of the African continent by European powers in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, seemed like one that portrayed the colonial period in Africa in a simplistic way, ultimately rewarding players for being the best at recreating a piece of history that included genocide in Namibia and mass enslavement in the Belgian Congo Free State. It had come under heavy critique from board gamers for, in the words of GMT’s own statement, “both topic and treatment” of its colonialist historical setting.

The company’s decision to pull the game fanned the flames of discussion in the relatively small board games community. While some praised GMT for the statement and decision, it infuriated others who saw the decision to pull the game as bowing to “politically correct” pressure or “erasing history.” Multi-page threads of arguing and insults saw BoardGameGeek moderators leaving whole strings of comments removed. When the game entry for Scramble for Africa was removed, those threads went to the entry for “Unpublished Prototype.” They’ve since drawn so much attention and commentary that Unpublished Prototype has shot to the top ranks of BoardGameGeek’s “The Hotness” list and stayed there all week.

Source: A Cancelled Board Game Revealed How Colonialism Inspires and Haunts Games - VICE
More Info: Should Board Gamers Play the Roles of Racists, Slavers and Nazis?

What do you make of the idea that certain subjects are too controversial to be made in to board games and what do you think it's implications are for gaming and society? Do you think the gaming company made the right decision to pull the game or not?

I'm not sure what to make of this. I had not heard of the game before. I do remember a controversy many years ago where some neo-Nazis had some kind of concentration camp game that seemed pretty sick and demented. I'm not sure if this game would fall in the same category, or if it's intended more towards historical board games.

I've played various Civil War, WW1, and WW2 games, as well several versions of the Civilization series. But they're more like strategy games, where there's very little graphic violence or any atrocities - it's just not part of the game. So, someone could play the Axis or the Confederate side with a clear conscience, since it's more like a game of chess than anything of any real political significance.

But I can see where a certain line can be crossed when it comes to some things. The Scramble for Africa was a real historical event, and through various artistic media, one may wish to depict that event so that people will remember it. But to depict it in the form of a game, one might have to do so carefully.

Of course, I recognize their right to produce any kind of game they wish, but if it generates controversy, so be it.

 

[Vidensia]

I saw a link to this on Christian forums and wondered what RF's take would be on the subject.

On April 7th, prominent publisher of board wargames GMT Games released a statement announcing that they’d pulled a game from their pre-order list: Scramble for Africa. The game, portraying the eponymous invasion of the African continent by European powers in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, seemed like one that portrayed the colonial period in Africa in a simplistic way, ultimately rewarding players for being the best at recreating a piece of history that included genocide in Namibia and mass enslavement in the Belgian Congo Free State. It had come under heavy critique from board gamers for, in the words of GMT’s own statement, “both topic and treatment” of its colonialist historical setting.

The company’s decision to pull the game fanned the flames of discussion in the relatively small board games community. While some praised GMT for the statement and decision, it infuriated others who saw the decision to pull the game as bowing to “politically correct” pressure or “erasing history.” Multi-page threads of arguing and insults saw BoardGameGeek moderators leaving whole strings of comments removed. When the game entry for Scramble for Africa was removed, those threads went to the entry for “Unpublished Prototype.” They’ve since drawn so much attention and commentary that Unpublished Prototype has shot to the top ranks of BoardGameGeek’s “The Hotness” list and stayed there all week.

Source: A Cancelled Board Game Revealed How Colonialism Inspires and Haunts Games - VICE
More Info: Should Board Gamers Play the Roles of Racists, Slavers and Nazis?

What do you make of the idea that certain subjects are too controversial to be made in to board games and what do you think it's implications are for gaming and society? Do you think the gaming company made the right decision to pull the game or not?

I don’t agree with their decision but seeing as I’m not on their payroll and part of their decision making, my opinion amounts to just that.

 

[Terry Sampson]

Scramble for Identity & The Struggle to Control the Past - WargameHQ

• Who gets to control the identity of the past?
• History is Complex & Horrible
• Outrage culture reigns

An interesting (IMO) blog by "WargameHQ"

 

[Nakosis]

I saw a link to this on Christian forums and wondered what RF's take would be on the subject.

On April 7th, prominent publisher of board wargames GMT Games released a statement announcing that they’d pulled a game from their pre-order list: Scramble for Africa. The game, portraying the eponymous invasion of the African continent by European powers in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, seemed like one that portrayed the colonial period in Africa in a simplistic way, ultimately rewarding players for being the best at recreating a piece of history that included genocide in Namibia and mass enslavement in the Belgian Congo Free State. It had come under heavy critique from board gamers for, in the words of GMT’s own statement, “both topic and treatment” of its colonialist historical setting.

The company’s decision to pull the game fanned the flames of discussion in the relatively small board games community. While some praised GMT for the statement and decision, it infuriated others who saw the decision to pull the game as bowing to “politically correct” pressure or “erasing history.” Multi-page threads of arguing and insults saw BoardGameGeek moderators leaving whole strings of comments removed. When the game entry for Scramble for Africa was removed, those threads went to the entry for “Unpublished Prototype.” They’ve since drawn so much attention and commentary that Unpublished Prototype has shot to the top ranks of BoardGameGeek’s “The Hotness” list and stayed there all week.

Source: A Cancelled Board Game Revealed How Colonialism Inspires and Haunts Games - VICE
More Info: Should Board Gamers Play the Roles of Racists, Slavers and Nazis?

What do you make of the idea that certain subjects are too controversial to be made in to board games and what do you think it's implications are for gaming and society? Do you think the gaming company made the right decision to pull the game or not?

It's a game. In a game you can choose to be whoever you want. A complete world dominating ******** if you want. Most people know the difference between a game and real life. In a game one can experience being as good as they want or as bad. To be someone else, to experience a different reality with different rules is the point. Not to be politically correct.

 

[Darkforbid]

Sounds like historical censorship to me,, I liked playing Total War games, it's a bit like calling the Zulu movie racist

 

[Stanyon]

Maybe a game where rival African tribes trade, wage war against each other, take slaves, commit genocide etc. for dominance on the continent would be more PC?

The Story of Africa| BBC World Service

African chiefs urged to apologise for slave trade | World news | The Guardian

An African country reckons with its history of selling slaves - The Washington Post

 

[Father Heathen]

Let's say you were a board game publisher, and you were approached by a designer to produce copies of their game "Concentration Camp Tycoon". Even if you brushed aside any considerations of morality and taste, would it be good business sense for you to produce and distribute such a product as far as image, reputation, publicity, etc. goes? Would you and your company be "anti free speech", "anti history", and "too PC" if you refused?

 

[Father Heathen]

All controversy is bad. We must question nothing
and all think alike.

So you wouldn't hesitate to invest your own money and reputation in such a product if you were a publisher?

 

[Father Heathen]

Sounds like historical censorship to me,, I liked playing Total War games, it's a bit like calling the Zulu movie racist

The designer still has the right to develop such a game, just as the the publisher has the right to reject distributing the product. As a private company they're not obligated to provide an unfettered platform.
They'll just have to find another publisher or start their own publishing company. And it's hardly "censoring history" as if this boardgame was a vital source of info.

 

[Darkforbid]

The designer still has the right to develop such a game, just as the the publisher has the right to reject distributing the product. As a private company they're not obligated to provide an unfettered platform.
They'll just have to find another publisher or start their own publishing company. And it's hardly "censoring history" as if this boardgame was a vital source of info.

So you just didn't bother reading any info on reactions of the game being pulled,,

'infuriated others who saw the decision to pull the game as bowing to “politically correct” pressure or “erasing history.”'

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I'm not sure what to make of this. I had not heard of the game before. I do remember a controversy many years ago where some neo-Nazis had some kind of concentration camp game that seemed pretty sick and demented. I'm not sure if this game would fall in the same category, or if it's intended more towards historical board games.

You mean this game? Video game depicting players as Nazi concentration camp guards sparks outrage in Poland | Daily Mail Online

It sounds pretty graphic but doesn't seem to be promoting Nazism. You could choose to play as a prisoner and rebel, too. It was never released, it seems.

 

[Father Heathen]

So you just didn't bother reading any info on reactions of the game being pulled,,

'infuriated others who saw the decision to pull the game as bowing to “politically correct” pressure or “erasing history.”'

Yes, I know that's how people feel about it, but their tears don't shape reality. Erasing history? That's whiny melodramatic hyperbole.
Would the Catholic Church's sex abuse scandal fade from history without a board game where you play as clergy competing to see who can molest the most kids?
Again, a private company isn't obligated to produce a controversial product that could damage it's reputation or cause monetary loss.
Personally, I don't care about the game. By all means design, produce, and play it. But I can understand why companies wouldn't want to touch it.

 

[LuisDantas]

Do you think that is a legitimate reason for you not to buy the game or for the company not to make it in the first place?

I am not @Amanaki , but certainly do.

Buying products amounts to encouraging their production and promoting the visibility of its themes.

It may however be helpful to point out that "boycotting" a board game such as this due to its theme and concepts is considerably less aggressive towards GMT than it may appear at first.

Unlike many other boycotts, this one does not come anywhere near the actual means of earning money that the company employs. There seem to be no significant intellectual properties to protect or to pay for, no royalties involved, and I would assume that there is not a whole lot of investiment that can't be redirected towards other games or, perhaps, a rethematization of this one.

I am not privy to any of GMT's reasoning, but I sure believe that they have neither need nor motivation for attaching themselves to such a specific and controversial theme. Odds are that it won't even have to sacrifice too much of its development investiment either, since it was pulled still in pre-order, before commiting to a press run. Rebrand it with a new theme and/or make use of the produced parts in some other game and you will regain it all, or close enough.

 

[Stevicus]

You mean this game? Video game depicting players as Nazi concentration camp guards sparks outrage in Poland | Daily Mail Online

It sounds pretty graphic but doesn't seem to be promoting Nazism. You could choose to play as a prisoner and rebel, too. It was never released, it seems.

I don't think it's the same game as I remember. It was much older, around 2000 or thereabouts.