Fortress America: When Gaming and Politics Collide

prosfilaes · Dec 26, 2011

Alzrius said:
I don't need to post examples because I've already told you precisely what it is I'm arguing against: intolerance.

One word adjectives are never precisely what you're arguing against. Clearly our definitions of intolerance don't come close to meeting.

But the flip side is to stand around and do nothing while people are intolerant in the first place.

Standing around while people are "intolerant" of a game blurb? No problem.

The first two are examples of intolerance, rather than intolerance towards instances of intolerance.

Exactly. Your "tolerance" doesn't extend to most of the religions in America.

The distinction is between communicating their offense, or stating why they feel that way. When people are making "I" statements, they're simply saying what they feel, which tends to be fine. It's when they start making "you" statements, saying what the other person "should" do, or "must" do, or "needs to" do, etc. that the problem comes.

So no giving advice. Is that all?

Your offense is yours. You can talk about it, but you can't make it someone else's problem.

That's a truism. Rant and rave all you want, but the other person doesn't have to care. Which is why I don't care about people saying they must not use that blurb; it means nothing and has no impact.

Boy Genius · Dec 26, 2011

Gosh, here's a crazy thought: If you create a game...don't make your own country the bad guy. It seems like that little piece of marketing wisdom could have saved a lot of headaches.

S'mon · Dec 26, 2011

Boy Genius said:
Gosh, here's a crazy thought: If you create a game...don't make your own country the bad guy. It seems like that little piece of marketing wisdom could have saved a lot of headaches.

I suspect that in Britain most boardgame buyers would happily buy one with us as the bad guys, but that's unusual. The US seems about evenly split, and outside the Anglosphere it would pretty much unheard of to have a negative portrayal of your own country marketed.

Alzrius · Dec 26, 2011

prosfilaes said:
One word adjectives are never precisely what you're arguing against. Clearly our definitions of intolerance don't come close to meeting.

One can argue against a specific concept or idea that's embodied in a single word, adjective or no. I also, for example, dislike "ginormous" and don't think it should be in the dictionary.

But that's anther argument.

Standing around while people are "intolerant" of a game blurb? No problem.

It's ignoring the little problems that allows the bigger problems to come along.

Exactly. Your "tolerance" doesn't extend to most of the religions in America.

If those religions are intolerant towards others who have different beliefs, then no I don't think that their intolerance is a good thing. How is that bad?

So no giving advice. Is that all?

Advice should be given when it's asked for, I believe. But again, this isn't about advice. It's about people thinking they're entitled to have others change to conform to their beliefs.

That's a truism. Rant and rave all you want, but the other person doesn't have to care. Which is why I don't care about people saying they must not use that blurb; it means nothing and has no impact.

You seem to be arguing my point here. I'm not saying you have to care about other people who are intolerant; I'm saying that I think that their intolerance is a bad thing, and so I speak out against it - that's all.

LurkAway · Dec 26, 2011

Morrus said:
The first text sounds more exciting to me than the second. The second one sounds kinda bland.

The first one is very emotional and sensational and polarizing ("horrifyingly destructive", "desperate fury", "lashing out mercilessly", "erased from the map", "stunned", "brutal"). I'm usually turned often turned off by histrionics in real-life. Histrionics in pure fantasy is quite normal when painting villians but, as stated above, I can't see this scenario as pure fantasy. The 2nd one is more moderate in tone, sounds more like there are 2 sides to the story, and I think I'd have more fun with that version because I don't feel like I'm playing some sort of propaganda game.

prosfilaes · Dec 27, 2011

Boy Genius said:
Gosh, here's a crazy thought: If you create a game...don't make your own country the bad guy. It seems like that little piece of marketing wisdom could have saved a lot of headaches.

They were and are in a hard place. If you want to reprint Fortress America for today, and feel you need to update your theme for today, where do you go?

It's been done before. Music and movies do it all the time. The Underground RPG savagely satirized the US government. The US government was the bad guy in Brave New World, though that was definitely an alternate world.

In this case, I think they missed the mark because Fortress America was right in line with a bunch of anti-Commie stories that Americans told, and twisting it 180 degrees annoyed a lot of people. Also, when making the US the bad guy, like Born in the USA, Apocalypse Now, Escape from New York, and the Underground RPG, you've got to tell stories that your audience accepts. When Underground makes the dominant party the Plutocrats, with the Republocrats the loyal opposition, that ties right into stories that Americans tell each other. The first blurb, that the US might go crazy and start blowing things up, is not a story Americans tell each other.

Nemesis Destiny · Dec 27, 2011

prosfilaes said:
The first blurb, that the US might go crazy and start blowing things up, is not a story Americans tell each other.

Perhaps not, but it IS a story the rest of the world tells each other. I'm not saying it was a good idea, given that the US is probably still their largest market, but that doesn't necessarily make it any less believable to anyone who isn't American.

Bladesong · Dec 27, 2011

Just Glad...

I'm just glad they are re-releasing the game...it was the only one in the series that I was unable to obtain.

Jhaelen · Dec 27, 2011

S'mon said:
I suspect that in Britain most boardgame buyers would happily buy one with us as the bad guys, but that's unusual. The US seems about evenly split, and outside the Anglosphere it would pretty much unheard of to have a negative portrayal of your own country marketed.

Hmm. I think the situation here in Germany is even more unusual. Could you imagine anyone trying to publish a (board) game portraying the Germans as the good guys?

Germans either have to be the bad guys or the game has to be utterly neutral towards every faction/country.

Regarding Fortress America I thought the old marketing text sounded a lot more appealing.

When it comes to games I'm completely unpolitical. If the game's great I don't care if it's called Fortress America, Fortress Russia, Fortress China, or Fortress Germany.
Having said that, I really prefer fantasy or sci-fi settings that are mostly unrelated to the real world.

NN · Dec 27, 2011

The premise of the game is utterly stupid, in all versions.

However, as a game it may be fun.

Therefore, the correct solution is to embrace the stupidity, and FFG should write an utterly absurd over-the-top Ollie-North-on-an-ether-binge early-80s-cold-war-retro type intro text that revels in its own absurdity and anachronisms.

Apologies if anyone already suggested this, i cant be bothered to read 9 pages.