Cards Against Humanity has made more than $12 million

http://www.chicagogrid.com/enterprise/cards-against-humanity-game-money/

by lenkendall • 13 years ago

280 162 13 years ago

The less travelled path - figuring out how to do it with fewer people so you can stay in control. Kudos to them for thinking for themselves.

Quote: 'And it’s dawning on them that they’re doing something impressive. “We’re doing a lot of stuff that no one has done before,” Hantoot reflects. “I do think we’re sort of proof that if you streamlined your business enough, you could do a big thing with a few people.”'

fsckin• 13 years ago

I gave CAH (and expansion packs) as stocking stuffers for xmas and they were extremely well received.

What they say on the tin is true -- you feel like a horrible person when you play the game, which is extremely cathartic.

Hell, they even did a pay what you want for a small package of Christmas themed cards and pretty sure they pulled a 70k profit from that maneuver, despite ~25% percent paying $0.

Their average credit card fee was $0.43 per transaction. Ouch!

http://www.cardsagainsthumanity.com/holidaystats/

coherentpony• 13 years ago

Yeah, processing credit cards is an absolute pain for vendors. American Express are probably the worst for vendors.

toomuchtodo3• 13 years ago

I'm an American Express cardholder and spend several hundred thousand dollars a year. If you're a small business, startup, someone I like, whatever, I go out of my way to pay you money with Dwolla or a debit card because of the fees. I'll even overnight a check if its a significant amount and I trust you.

nhangen• 13 years ago

But great for customers. I use my Amex on everything, and often won't shop where I know it won't be accepted. I just love the company.

gcb0• 13 years ago

Out of the us visa used to win that title. Not sure now.

This also makes me wonder what kind of deal Costco have... Since i doubt they bend to those things easily.

tommi• 13 years ago

What caught my eye there was that they donated the $70,000 to Wikimedia foundation. I checked their financial report (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/6/68/Jul-D...) and the top five costs are:

  Salaries and Wages 7,468,743
  Outside Contract Services 1,791,275
  Internet Hosting 1,309,591 
  Other Operating Expenses 1,010,273
  Bank Fees 945,190

That is not the cost structure I expected. I thought the balance would be more on Internet Hosting. What are those ~10 million of salaries, contracts and other operating expenses? Besides, their expenses were 15 million and income 30 million, do they need more money?

z-factor2• 13 years ago

Wikimedia employs a lot of people, I personally do not donate because I believe they employ way too many. Also pretty much all costs are already covered by corporate sponsors like Google.

benologist• 13 years ago

The cost of a single salary is the equivalent of dozens of servers in many situations.

lifeisstillgood• 13 years ago

Holy misunderstood Accountancy Batman !

I thought you were quoting the accounts of Cards Against Humanity - 1mm usd on Internet hosting seemed a bit much.

benatkin• 13 years ago

How does that compare to the amount of money Minecraft has made?

eli• 13 years ago

Minecraft has surely made much more. But I don't see the connection.

adamnemecek• 13 years ago

How does the amount of money Minecraft has made compare with the amount of money Google has made?

recursive• 13 years ago

It's less. But surely you knew that.

polymatter• 13 years ago

compared to how much work was put into it you mean. none of them work fulltime on this.

evan_2• 13 years ago

Is this just Apples to Apples except all the cards are Family Guy jokes?

azylman• 13 years ago

No, it's Apples to Apples except fun.

ImprovedSilence2• 13 years ago

yeah, it's a pretty hilarious game. Especially when combined with copious amounts of beer and the right kind of friends. I think this actually shows that there may be a big market for non-politically correct games and "stuff" that big burdened corporations won't touch, but the market would be more than willing to gobble up.

SippinLean• 13 years ago

"Pixelated bukkake?!? Sooooooooo random XD"

lenkendall2• 13 years ago

Comparing this game to Apples to Apples isn't really fair because the genius isn't in the formula (which is really basic) but in the content.

UnoriginalGuy4• 13 years ago

They aren't really "family guy jokes." Many of them are "I'm going to hell for saying this" jokes. Things that network television cannot air.

I won't even repeat many of them here for fear of getting shadow banned.

eli_gottlieb4• 13 years ago

Ok, substitute to "South Park jokes". Same deal.

saraid2162• 13 years ago

If you weren't aware, Family Guy is a fairly popular low-brow humor cartoon TV show. It's in the same category as The Simpsons or South Park.

Recoil42• 13 years ago

It's Apple to Apples except all the cards are hilarious (and yes, obscenely vulgar), rather than just [random boring pop culture reference].

Symmetry• 13 years ago

Similar, but you're matching words into phrases rather than adjectives with nouns.

obviouslygreen2• 13 years ago

Yeah, basically toilet humor. Granted, a lot of it is funny, but it's the non-family-friendly version (not that Apples to Apples is all that family-friendly once my family starts playing, and I'm sure that's the same with many others, but at least it has the potential to avoid offending most people's delicate sensibilities).

This is the juvenile dorm room version (which makes sense, as that's what they created it for in the first place).

king_jester• 13 years ago

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).

endtime• 13 years ago

I've played with white women (and one Hispanic woman) who also enjoyed it. I've never seen anyone not enjoy the game.

Most of the people I've played with are Jews, and the presence of cards like "Auschwitz" and "Nazis" isn't a problem. The game is only really unplayable for people who take themselves too seriously.

mnicole2• 13 years ago

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 anymore and people become bored. They'd have benefited from including different folks so that the jokes were different and meant different things to different people. Part of the fun/unexpected educational aspect is learning what the cards are referring to if you don't know (forcing people to learn about things outside of their worldview in an effort to make them funnier is a great incentive).

As it stands, if you're not a gamer, aware of internet culture or you don't find tragedies hilarious, you may have a hard time finding enjoyment from it.

aerolite• 13 years ago

I (Hispanic) recently played with a group of Hispanic, black, old, young, and white people and it was hilarious/fun.

eli_gottlieb4• 13 years ago

More "South Park jokes", but yeah.

I swing back and forth on which one I like better. Cards Against Humanity is fun because it lets you come out and say truly horrible things. Apples to Apples is fun because it lets you imply truly horrible things in really creative ways.

At its best (read: I am indeed a horrible person), either one is like drawing a smiley face on Hitler.

Fishkins• 13 years ago

> Cards Against Humanity is fun because it lets you come out and say truly horrible things. Apples to Apples is fun because it lets you imply truly horrible things in really creative ways.

To each their own, but this is precisely why I hate Cards Against Humanity. It ruins the joke by being too blunt and predictable.

lowboy• 13 years ago

Pretty much. My friends found that the game wore very quickly compared to Apples to Apples. Pick the most offensive one, it'll win. Down to luck really.

narohi• 13 years ago

Perhaps this is out of the norm, but winning isn't relevant in the groups with which I have played the game. Laughing and having a good time until we are humored out is usually the point (we don't even keep score).

Falling3• 13 years ago

My wife calls Apples to Apples the Cards Against Humanity for grandmas. (Her grandma really likes Apples to Apples)

jamieb• 13 years ago

Says wikipedia: The Onion AV Club interview calls the game "a sort of Apples To Apples for the crass and jaded."

i.e. perfect for parents =)

obviouslygreen2• 13 years ago

This is awesome, but not creating a corporate structure at all and just letting who does and gets what go organically is a really bad idea. It's nice that it's worked for them so far, but if they continue to succeed -- and I hope they do, I love what they've done -- they're very likely to find out that money does matter and does change things.

wittyphrasehere• 13 years ago

Maybe they'll turn it into a worker-owned coop and all participate equally in the governing, and ownership, of the company. http://electricembers.coop/pubs/TechCoopHOWTO.pdf

michaelochurch4• 13 years ago

Whatever replaces VC-istan and generates the next wave of great businesses is going to be built by guys like this.

Also, it'll probably happen in the Midwest. Chicago, Austin, Madison, and Minneapolis are among the cities to watch.

scott_karana• 13 years ago

Why won't it happen everywhere? At least from what I've seen, it's more of a decentralization than a migration from SV. No sense pre-emptively pigeonholing!

michaelochurch4• 13 years ago

You're right. I think the Midwest has a few advantages, which are (a) excellent universities and (b) low costs of living.

ImprovedSilence2• 13 years ago

Ya know, I can't explain it, but I've been getting some good vibes from the Midwest lately. (me being a North easterner) Plus the people are pretty awesome. I'd keep Minneapolis on that list too.

dos1• 13 years ago

+1 for Minneapolis. I pay pretty close attention to the start up scene here and things are starting to move. The Minne* Organization (http://minnestar.org/) does some nice events.

enjo• 13 years ago

Don't forget about Denver! Lots of interesting stuff going on here. Between Tech Stars and Galvanize, things are really amazing around here.

michaelochurch4• 13 years ago

I added Minneapolis. I agree. It's a good choice.

bdcravens• 13 years ago

I always have to root for Texas, but aren't there quite a few VC-funded companies in Austin?

chiph• 13 years ago

Austin has traditionally been home to "lifestyle" firms. But there are increasingly firms which have VC funding (from Austin Ventures, etc)

michaelochurch4• 13 years ago

VC-funded != VC-istan. There's a lot of overlap, obviously, but (a) plenty of VCs aren't assholes, and (b) there are good reasons to take VC.

VC-istan is a certain social hierarchy and its surrounding ecosystem. It's a certain game that is played where engineering, design, culture, and even human decency take a backseat to marketing and rent-seeking and ridiculous careerism (like technical pivots that make no engineering sense but support some flavor-of-the-month CTO protege's career goals).

I don't hate every VC-funded company, obviously. Who knows, in ten years I could be running one. I hate the VC darlings with unethical management and, for that, I only find the VCs to be indirectly responsible by being bad judges of character. (Then again, considering some of the companies I worked for, I don't think I'm a great judge of character either.)

205guy• 13 years ago

I agree that there are other forms of business organizations, and perhaps other forms of companies. For example B-corps that have non-financial goals, or simply like these guys who essentially have a successful on-the-side business, and explicitly do not want to grow it or market it in the traditional way (and hopefully have the legal protection to do so without somebody from the regular business world eating their lunch). A lot of them seem to revolve around the concept of "having enough" as opposed to "trying to expand."

However, I don't agree that any of these new models are generalizable and will take over the traditional model. VCs did not replace small business loans or Wall Street capitalization. They are an alternative path or sometimes a different step on the same path. The traditional model will contine to exist where it already does, and the new models will have to carve out new niches.

goloxc• 13 years ago

ever talked with open-mic stand-ups about why some jokes are funny?

love it when a business professor analyzes why something like this game is so successful

tedchs• 13 years ago

Online Cards Against Humanity quote generator: http://scriptagainsthumanity.appspot.com/

Chico75• 13 years ago

Why do it needs to be logged in with Google to try it?

michaelhoffman• 13 years ago

It's interesting that they blank out the MICR routing number at the bottom or the check but leave enough information elsewhere in the check to trivially figure it out.

mikeurbanski3• 13 years ago

We're doing the same thing. Our team is located in NYC, London, and Aurora, IL.

We launched our little meta-board gaming company at http://susd.pretend-money.com a little over 1.5 months ago. And we're already profitable!

We made a conscious decision to forego taking money from advertisers/investors, and even dodged a pre-launch acquihire offer, in an attempt to create something that's 100% our vision (unless YC wanted to fund us.) Our plan is to grow slowly, keep up the quality, and use the money that we're making from the show/blog/podcast to fund even more ambitious community/tech projects.

AND!

Board Games are Big Business!

Board/card/traditional gaming (whatever you want to call it) has been exploding in America over the last 10 years or so. It taps into that primal need for people to sit around together and ACTUALLY interact with each other.

We're in a bit of a "Golden Age of Board Gaming". Quinns gave a hilarious talk on the subject: http://susd.pretend-money.com/videos/v/board-game-golden-age...

DizzyDoo• 13 years ago

I absolutely love Shut Up and Sit Down, I followed Quinns over from Rock Paper Shotgun and have enjoyed the videos very much since. I'm very happy to hear you're profitable already.

I would love to see what the Quinns and Paul think of Machine Of Death, a similarly mega-funded card game Kickstarter (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1234131468/machine-of-de...) when it arrives.

mikeurbanski3• 13 years ago

Thanks!

We're "profitable". We're really happy with how the new site turned out. Having enough to keep the lights on an pay some friends to help out with the writing after only a month is a huge accomplishment.

I'm pretty curious about MoD too! We'll see what happens.

JonLim2• 13 years ago

A bit confused, but curious: you guys are essentially curating board games to promote and sell, am I right?

I'm just trying to figure out if you guys make them or just talk about them. :) Either way, a lot of great content on there.

mikeurbanski3• 13 years ago

We don't make board games, we're just wildly passionate about them. Paul & Quinns started Shut Up & Sit Down so they could have fun reviewing and writing about board games. They just had a hard time figuring out how to make it sustainable.

I've been playing with technology surrounding gaming for the last three years or so(and gaming since I was little) so it was natural for us all to team up and build something together.

replicatorblog• 13 years ago

It's not often discussed, but 20% of Kickstarter's top 20 projects are board games. The Pebble and Ouya skew the average, but D&D style games with little plastic figurines clean up with multiple games clearing $2MM or more.

http://www.crowdfundinsider.com/2013/05/15415-ranked-31-mill...

jdludlow• 13 years ago

Kickstarter is a huge topic on BoardgameGeek.com. It's everywhere, and tends to dominate the discussions of new titles. It's all over the site, but the concentrated discussion is here:

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/forum/915012/kickstarter/genera...

gsibble7• 13 years ago

I love CaH but I do have to say that the founders are full of themselves. I and several other friends/entrepreneurs have reached out to them regarding ideas to build associated products that would help build their brand. Even companion apps and such since their content is under Creative Commons. Every single one of us was sent back extremely rude and vile replies. This article just reeks of more narcissism.

It's a real shame too. It will go out of style in a year or two and, gasp, maybe these people will have to get real jobs or start a real company! Assholes.

gonehome• 13 years ago

I'm curious what they said to you or how they were rude.

gsibble7• 13 years ago

Our proposal was to replicate the CaH experience online without any commercial nature (no ads, fully free and open sourced) with the possibility of making it commercial at a later date together.

Their response basically dismissed us out of hand and included warnings regarding violating their copyright or using their name. I've never received such a reply to a very friendly partnership proposal.

gsibble7• 13 years ago

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 content (this means ad revenue is not allowed), and you have to share whatever you make in the same way we share it (this means you can’t submit our content to any app store). We own the name “Cards Against Humanity,” so you have to call your crappy thing something else.

hyperbovine2• 13 years ago

I'm shocked--shocked!--that the guys behind Cards Against Humanity responded rudely to your attempt to piggyback off their idea.

Here's an idea: go build your own brand!

gsibble7• 13 years ago

As I said elsewhere, our idea was not commercial and no money would have been involved.

JonLim2• 13 years ago

As this is a rather one-sided story, I'm inclined to disagree based on my experience with them.

Me and a buddy of mine are really big CAH fans, and we had been playing on a set of cards that he printed and cut at that point. We had also been meaning to start a project together, so to test the waters, we started working on a digital version of CAH that would be open sourced and could be freely enjoyed by everyone.

I made the wise decision to reach out and get their blessing before we really began working on it, and one of the founders replied in short order, essentially telling us that we couldn't go ahead with our project because they wanted to control what was released. It's been a while since the correspondence happened, so please excuse my memory, but it was something to that effect.

However, they were very courteous and concise the entire time, and were not even close to being rude. So I find your account a bit hard to believe.

city41• 13 years ago

Some people do take any rejection, even fully polite and sincere rejection, as rude because rejection is not fun to receive.

gsibble7• 13 years ago

It was rude in the sense that it included legal threats regarding copyright and they refused to entertain any sort of correspondence in the future. It was by far the most rude partnership request reply I have ever received.

colinyoung• 13 years ago

As far as I know, the guys don't have a top-down structure, so they're unable to make calls like that individually - and besides, they're hustlers. They made CaH in-house, bootstrapped, and entirely by-hand. It's not narcissistic to want to do things yourself, but it is possible to erroneously think that "anyone can do it". I've sensed a bit of that from the founders, but honestly - it's motivational for me to hear that, and while I would hope not to be dismissive or inflated if I had similar success, I also certainly think we need more people saying, "Why the hell not just do it yourself? Why raise money? Build it tomorrow!"

Also, you were expecting something other than vulgarity from the founders of a game like that? They have a brand to uphold, after all. I don't think it's necessary to be rude, but that's precisely in line with their entire "brand voice".

gsibble7• 13 years ago

Yes, my expectations were perhaps out of line. It didn't stop me from ceasing using their game and, after showing the reply to friends, their voluntary stop of play as well. We simply couldn't enjoy it anymore :(

jvrossb• 13 years ago

That's unfortunate. I have the opposite anecdote - they've been extremely kind and responsive every time I've been in touch.

guelo• 13 years ago

Come up with your own idea instead of trying to ride the coattails of something that is already a huge hit. I'm sure they have plenty of ideas and projects to work on without having to give you a cut of it.

gsibble7• 13 years ago

Our product was not commercial in nature. Simply a way of helping to spread awareness of CaH as fans.

avalaunch• 13 years ago

Fair comment except that cards against humanity is pretty much just riding the coattails of an already huge hit itself.

nandemo• 13 years ago

A lot of successful business partnerships can be described by "riding the coattails of a hit". If they're being straightforward and proposing a partnership, as opposed to (say) simply copying it, I don't see the problem.

pherz• 13 years ago

I might take your post at face value, but I know the Cards guys are currently working on releasing a CBS-property branded expansion pack. If CBS' guys can can do it, I have to question your pitch. It sounds like you're on the other end of trope where the "idea guy" goes to programmer with lame idea; maybe the idea was even good but something else in the message that proved it would never work.

It's a real shame too. It will go out of style in a year or two and, gasp, maybe these people will have to get real jobs or start a real company! Assholes.

With a grudge like that, who's the one full of themselves now? They didn't follow the standard business song and dance. So what? Who cares? I'd might even say "good on them" if I knew the full situation.

start a real company

Yeah! Their product isn't ruthless data harvesting. What are they, babies?

smmnyc• 13 years ago

The $12 million figure isn't confirmed. Just the author speculating based on reported sales figures and "made" doesn't account for the cost of producing the game.

mnicole2• 13 years ago

This is super janky (sorry if anyone here made it), but there's an online version here -- http://pyz.socialgamer.net/game.jsp

nbashaw• 13 years ago

One of the founders says the article's financial speculation is "wildly incorrect"

https://twitter.com/MaxTemkin/status/335124440469876737

mdisraeli2• 13 years ago

I was first introduced to this as Thousand White Cards Against Humanity, wherein instead of drawing from the deck or playing a card, you could take a blank and write in a new card. Compared to that, the boxed version just seems crass and unimaginative.

On the other hand, I'm normally the one to introduce groups to Apples To Apples. Those who claim this more tame version of the concept isn't fun are missing the real joy - how a limited set of choices forces surreality, playing for the person, and twisted readings of the cards.

Of course, if you're playing any of these as straight-up "this one wins", you are missing the incredible joy of "hamburgers smell, but only the bad ones are fragrant. Hilter probably was fragrant, but I doubt anyone lived to tell the tale. My birthday, however, boy was that fragrant...". The verdict slow-descriptive-reveal as the judge is the real art, and where you learn the most about people

cavilling_elite• 13 years ago

Please explain the second way to play! I am completely missing this! Is it in the ruleset?

mdisraeli2• 13 years ago

The thousand blank white cards version is pretty obvious from my description, although I should add that you can do this for question cards, and you can specify that players have to play more than one card.

As for the advanced judging concept, it is exactly the same as the original, right up until the judge makes a decision:

1. Judge plays the question card. They can do this however they like

2. players pick and play a card in secret from their hand, placing it face-down

3. Judge shuffles the pile a little, to make sure they don't know who played what

4. Judge views the cards

Original Apples to apples rules strict reading:

5. Judge reveals all the cards played

6. Judge announces that one is the winner

7. player who played it gets the question card as a point

Theatrical version:

The judge, in any order they like, describes why some cards are discarded, and others stay in the running:

A: ' "My first car" and "football" are weak compared to "cheese" and "the French revolution" '

B: 'I hated "My First car", so it's not that one!'

C: 'Hah, you canny bastard who played this, I can never resist "cheese" ' [1]

C: ' ewwwwww, not that kind of "cheese" pulls disgusted face ' other players laugh. One groans. Another doesn't get it

The game is about words, descriptions, and events. To just say the word on the card seems... so out of character? (Plus, the original box art featured a greek/roman character, so pretend you're a philosopher if you like, or a mad emperor :P)

[1] The actual classic amongst my friends is any that are physics related, due to being post-grads

Cushman• 13 years ago

I had this mostly written up, so I'm going to say pretty much what my sibling said in a different way :)

It's not about the ruleset so much as the players' attitudes.

There's a way to play Apples to Apples that's as a card game. You deal the cards, flip a topic, everyone puts up, the judge reveals the cards and picks a winner. It's pretty boring unless the cards themselves are hilariously lewd, hence CAH. (And I've played rounds of CAH this way that were just as boring.)

There's another way to play it, more like a role-playing game with the cards as a prop. The judging is a discursive experience played with the whole group. When the cards are revealed, due attention must be given to each one. "Fuzzy like teenagers. Fuzzy like... The Clinton administration? Fuzzy like herding cats, okay. Fuzzy like... Dinosaurs." Once all the cards are on the table, the judging begins. Unlike in the card game version, the cards which aren't relevant must be dealt with explicitly, and audience participation is encouraged.

"Dinosaurs just aren't fuzzy."

"What about pterodactyls?"

"Yeah, birds are technically dinosaurs."

"Okay, but birds aren't fuzzy, they're fluffy."

"Maybe it's fuzzy on the inside. Like dinosaurs have nice personalities."

If I'm hawking my own card, that's minus points. Or is that not my card, and I'm trying to sandbag it with praise? Complex interpersonal dynamics meet linguistics as every judge's turn becomes a little game to itself. And just wait until cards start to turn up that tie into previous rounds...

It requires the players be engaged and committed to playing with each other, rather than with the cards, but it's hopefully obvious how that's fun in a way that has little or nothing to do with the content of the cards themselves. So nothing against CAH or other forks, but people who think CAH is fun where A2A isn't probably don't understand what makes the concept fun in the first place.

mhartl• 13 years ago

The success of Cards Against Humanity is evidence of massive demand, and yet all they have protecting them is their brand—unlike, say, craigslist, whose unwillingness to innovate is legendary but whose business benefits from massive network effects. As a result, the (apparent) apathy of the Cards Against Humanity founders offers an opportunity: copy their basic idea, for which they have no protection, and structure your new venture as a real business with full-time efforts devoted to growing sales. You could even one-up them by dropping the non-commercial clause in the Creative Commons license, allowing potential partners to profit and thereby grow your brand further.

The Cards Against Humanity guys are leaving money on the table. Who's going to pick it up?

mikecane• 13 years ago

I wonder, would this get rejected at the iOS App Store on grounds of taste or something? (That's aside from the fact it'd probably be DMCAed away if someone did it.)

UnoriginalGuy4• 13 years ago

I would imagine Apple would take it down quite quickly given how they shy away from even the most subtle of controversies.

Not to mention it is illegal or near illegal in a lot of locations (e.g. UK).

prawn• 13 years ago

Is it really bad taste if the questionable combinations (and their assessment) are purely at the hands of players?

ghempton2• 13 years ago

Check out https://deckepic.com

doctorpangloss• 13 years ago

Hell I made the whole thing online

http://www.redactedonline.com

Tobu• 13 years ago

Put some time limits or let anyone judge, it keeps getting stuck on “Waiting For Others”.

Cyranix• 13 years ago

If you manage to get a copy of Apples to Apples, Disney Edition (not sure if that's the real title) then you can play the mashup I was exposed to several weeks ago: Cards Against Disney. Everyone has a hand with cards from both games; a prompt is drawn from one game and answered with cards from the other game, alternating each turn. Much silliness ensues.

cpeterso2• 13 years ago

When I was young, I liked to mix the questions and answers from different Trivial Pursuit cards. A kind of surreal "Trivial Pursuit: Exquisite Corpse Edition." :)

egypturnash2• 13 years ago

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.

mmirate• 13 years ago

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"?

ghempton2• 13 years ago

Perhaps this is the perfect time to shamelessly self-promote a side project: https://deckepic.com is a Facebook-driven dynamic CAH card generator.

mrbill2• 13 years ago

I've given away 10-12 complete CAH sets to friends. Not a single person has said "oh that game is boring", and more than one of them has come back later and told me it was their favorite birthday/Christmas present, etc.

It's also a great way to judge if you'll get along with someone.

Kiro• 13 years ago

I don't understand what's so good about this game. What am I missing? I don't find the example cards funny at all.

Cards Against Humanity has made more than $12 million

Related Stories