Competitive Analysis

Cards against Humanity is a judging game that’s like an X-rated mix of Apples to Apples and Mad Libs. Play goes exactly as it does for Apples to Apples, with the only difference being the aesthetics of the cards and, of course, the topics. The cards are filled with taboo subjects, encouraging players to combine them in outrageous ways. Because of the nature of these cards, my initial instinct is to assert that this game requires a high degree of vulnerability, and therefore is not suited to strangers. However, because players are forced to play the cards they are dealt, it makes them less culpable for the terrible, despicable combinations they create.

The nature of the game certainly excludes a certain audience that is more proper, or politically correct. However, I don’t think this is necessarily something I would change, since there really is no good way to include this group without creating a literal Apples to Apples clone. Instead, I would focus the game more on appealing even more to the audience they are already targeting. When I played this game, players would often try to subtly influence the Card Czar by laughing more or less at the reveal of cards or commenting on cards to influence the way everyone is thinking about them. Because the target audience is more privy to the less ethically just pursuits, I think including an aspect of bluffing could be a great thematic addition to the game. This could be implemented with the mechanic of betting, whether this is betting black cards against the house or perhaps wagering a lower hand limit. If a player has a weak hand, they could bluff and make the Card Czar less likely to pick the strongest card, unintentionally picking the weak card of the clever bluffer. This would increase the competitive aesthetic of the game.

About the author

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.