DISCLAIMER: this is a highly-subjective critique of game mechanics and tropes. Your mileage may vary. I'll likely not be interested in debating about this.
---
I'm starting to have an issue, personally, with games that have high levels of player interaction and deceit involved. I don't like the idea of lying to one another to "get ahead."
I recently played Sheriff of Nottingham and this came to a head. I did very well and came in second place out of a group of 5 players in my first-ever game session of it. This may or may not have had something to do with the fact that I was last player (I strongly suspect that the game has a "last player advantage"). But I honestly didn't want to win. I felt like a real shit heel for most of the game.
Later that evening as I was reflecting on the day's events before sleep, I thought more about that game and a potential tactic I could have engaged to both put the other players in a quandary, and put myself in a very powerful position. Again, this is why I suspect that the last player in this game has a strong advantage over others. But I also acknowledged that, had I engaged in the tactic, I would have been a real jerk.
What's with this trend? I've played a lot of other games that are highly-interactive and rely on deception in the past several years. There are also games that come to mind where I played as the typically-recognized "bad guy" that didn't engender such a visceral reaction.
I played the original Werewolf and strongly disliked it. Same with Saboteur. However, I've played One Night Ultimate Werewolf, initially under duress at a game night, and had a better reaction to it. I played Secret Hitler once in a small group and found it interesting, as well as some Russian Roulette-themed card game, and didn't feel so bad about it. I found Battlestar Galactica highly-entertaining through several plays, and the one time I made it through a game of Dead of Winter I found it interesting. Avalon was annoying, and I don't think I even want to try Citadels or Resistance or some of those other hidden-role games.
There seems to be a "tipping point" regarding traitor mechanics, bluffing, and deception that beyond which I personally just can't stand a game. Arbitrarily hating on someone so I "win," choosing a target from among an assortment of people I either play with regularly or are playing with for the first time... It generally turns my stomach. I don't have an enjoyable feeling from these games, even though there's a high level of player interaction involved.
This is different from hidden auction/betting, which seems to be something I enjoy a great deal. I'm not sure how else to articulate my feelings other than, "I don't like lying to other people in order to have fun at game night." Am I just looking for "good sportsmanship?" A sense of fair play?
Comments
Interesting topic.
As a game designer who is developing one of these 'bluffing/hidden team' games this is pretty interesting. I can totally understand how a person would not find these games enjoyable, especially if that person has had personal experiences with poor trust and deception.
My theory as to why a lot of people love to play these games is because I believe the majority of people are nice, decent people who rarely use deception is real-life scenarios. These kind of games give us a structured way to break these social rules and it can be pretty hilarious for everyone involved, even for those who are on the receiving end of the deception.
I think you summarised your viewpoint clearly at the end: "I don't like lying to other people in order to have fun at game night." That's all there is to it. Some people find enjoyment in that, some don't.
"I'm starting to have an
"I'm starting to have an issue, personally, with games that have high levels of player interaction and deceit involved. I don't like the idea of lying to one another to "get ahead."
I very much agree, as do others (Sam Healy from Dice Tower). I don't like being told I HAVE to lie, or tell the truth. For me it depends on the situation and my mood.