Small World and SmallWorlds deny being part of social games addiction case
Days of Wonder claimed in a harsh, official rebuttal that, "Contrary to incorrect reports published in several English newspapers and their respective websites, Days of Wonder's Small World board game is not connected to the tragedy that occurred in the London suburb of Swanley." "Apparently journalists and editors of some British newspapers can't be bothered to check facts and distinguish between 'smallworlds.com' and the family board game 'Small World.'"
However, SmallWorlds (seen above), an entirely different game played on the website of the same name, has also denied any role in the child neglect case. The official denial claims that some news outlets used images of its game while referring to Small World, the social game created by Days of Wonder (confusing, we know).
British game news website RockPaperShotgun spoke with Mercury Press writer Roger Pearson, who claimed that, "The best I can tell you is that the judge and lawyers all referred in court to a game called Small World – not Worlds." "Whether they were wrong in the way they were referring to it we can't say."
While the existence of a court case regarding a woman facing child and animal neglect charges due to excessive time with a social game is indisputable, we're now unsure of which game it was if either at all.
Do you think it matters which game the mother of three was hooked on? Does it bring shame to a game when tragedy strikes like this that is associated with it? Even if the game in question is one of these two, is it the creators' responsibility to respond to the issue? Let us know what you think. Add Comment.
[Via Inc Gamers]