Earlier quoted context omitted.
Essentially yes. The game is massively unplayable for a lot of different kinds of people due to the really triggering nature of the card content (rape jokes, pedophilia, racism, sexism, etc.). A lot of people find that content to be one of its virtues, but I've generally found that only certain kinds of people really enjoy CAH (read: white men).
I love the game in small doses, but it's very obvious there wasn't much diversification in the team that made it. Not because it would have curbed the offensiveness, but because after two or three hours of playing [as happens in larger groups], and even with hundreds of cards and endless combinations, the formula of offensive card (either based on history, internet humor or shaming) + offensive card just isn't funny…
Cards Against Humanity has made more than $12 million
171–173 of 173 posts
Re: Cards Against Humanity has made more than $12 million
#172Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm curious what they said to you or how they were rude.
FWIW, this is from their FAQ on their website, showing a little of their respect for anyone who wants to partner with them: Do I have your permission to make some crappy Cards Against Humanity thing like an app? Cards Against Humanity is available under a BY-NC-SA 2.0 Creative Commons license. That means you can use our content to make whatever, but you have to give us credit, you can’t profit from the use of our con…
PS: If anyone offered to help me "build my brand" on a CC project, I'd tell them to sod off too. No offense.
Re: Cards Against Humanity has made more than $12 million
#173Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the best idea ever and I think I need to try it. I'd suggest calling it "Disney against Humanity" - but then again I used to work in animation, maybe I'm bitter.
Disney's copyright lobbying suggests that your bitterness is completely appropriate. Ever wonder why the Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998 was nicknamed the "Mickey Mouse Protection Act"?