great commentary on a challenging subject Liz! I think it's pretty rad that designers are taking on subjects (votes for women, obsession, onoda) that are pretty unconventional. This one does a lot to question ethics and the sad part of the tale. I often wonder that about wargames. playing out with little bits and bobs and toys, what were ostensibly horrifying events. (not a comment on good or bad nature of this) interesting is all, about how board games arent just toys, perhaps?
I was aware of Lt. Onoda’s story before today. But if you gave me 100,000 guesses, I never would have guessed that someone would make a game based on his experiences. Not that I’m complaining. Variety is the spice of life!
That's some heady s#*t. You'd hear about him from time to time, of course, as a child in the 1970s. But these images were all largely from a place of gross derision ("you hear about the guy who didn't know the war was over?"). The worst offender, indeed the most unforgivable one, was episode the "Gilligan's Island" episode I saw as a kid ("So Sorry, My Island Now", 1965). That horrific racist portrayal alone was awful, with the curious - and storied - character actor Vito Scotti in the unfortunate role as the soldier, but it also felt like a lot like "punching down" to me as a kid (perhaps not how it might have felt to a US or British veteran of the pacific campaign, of course). Reading the soldier's account, which I actually didn't know existed before this video, would have done much to complicate this crude caricature. But a game, where you personally struggle to maintain "honor" as your victory goal (or at least as mechanical goal) does a different kind of work and gets at a harder truth. So, I can see it being uncomfortable, absolutely, but on first blush, I'd say the result is a story that perhaps trouble's another, more accepted story, and is therefore welcome. But again, this is the first I've heard of much of this.
@@paulrobbins760 You are correct about that poor portrayal on “Gilligan’s Island”. But I’ll give credit to you for also mentioning the American and British WW2 vets. I had a close older relative who was a WW2 vet. And I could never buy a Japanese car as long as he was alive. He would have disowned me. Was that irrational? Yes. But it was also understandable. It’s a complicated subject.
I can imagine this game gives us a weird experience and will nearly obligate us to do things that are against our ethic mind... We also can choose to not do them but then probably we'll lose... We also can choose to not back this game so we don't need to do them at all... You played the game, do you have the feeling this game is a one time experience or does it invite to play it more? I like the quality and design, I would like to back it, but 'something' makes me hesitate...
great commentary on a challenging subject Liz! I think it's pretty rad that designers are taking on subjects (votes for women, obsession, onoda) that are pretty unconventional. This one does a lot to question ethics and the sad part of the tale. I often wonder that about wargames. playing out with little bits and bobs and toys, what were ostensibly horrifying events. (not a comment on good or bad nature of this) interesting is all, about how board games arent just toys, perhaps?
I see board games as more than toys, for sure. I love seeing efforts to push into new and interesting territory.
I was aware of Lt. Onoda’s story before today. But if you gave me 100,000 guesses, I never would have guessed that someone would make a game based on his experiences.
Not that I’m complaining. Variety is the spice of life!
It is a wild theme to be sure!
This seems interesting. Makes me think of Friday plus Airborne in the Pocket.
That's some heady s#*t. You'd hear about him from time to time, of course, as a child in the 1970s. But these images were all largely from a place of gross derision ("you hear about the guy who didn't know the war was over?"). The worst offender, indeed the most unforgivable one, was episode the "Gilligan's Island" episode I saw as a kid ("So Sorry, My Island Now", 1965). That horrific racist portrayal alone was awful, with the curious - and storied - character actor Vito Scotti in the unfortunate role as the soldier, but it also felt like a lot like "punching down" to me as a kid (perhaps not how it might have felt to a US or British veteran of the pacific campaign, of course). Reading the soldier's account, which I actually didn't know existed before this video, would have done much to complicate this crude caricature. But a game, where you personally struggle to maintain "honor" as your victory goal (or at least as mechanical goal) does a different kind of work and gets at a harder truth. So, I can see it being uncomfortable, absolutely, but on first blush, I'd say the result is a story that perhaps trouble's another, more accepted story, and is therefore welcome. But again, this is the first I've heard of much of this.
@@paulrobbins760 You are correct about that poor portrayal on “Gilligan’s Island”. But I’ll give credit to you for also mentioning the American and British WW2 vets.
I had a close older relative who was a WW2 vet. And I could never buy a Japanese car as long as he was alive. He would have disowned me. Was that irrational? Yes. But it was also understandable.
It’s a complicated subject.
I can imagine this game gives us a weird experience and will nearly obligate us to do things that are against our ethic mind... We also can choose to not do them but then probably we'll lose... We also can choose to not back this game so we don't need to do them at all... You played the game, do you have the feeling this game is a one time experience or does it invite to play it more? I like the quality and design, I would like to back it, but 'something' makes me hesitate...
I'm definitely glad I spent time with this one but I don't think I'll keep it on my shelf forever, if that makes sense.
@@BeyondSolitaire that makes sense! 😌