Agreed on all points. The concepts of colonialism, imperialism, and military supremacy aren't anything new. What is considered "fair game" for thematic devic

Agreed on all points. The concepts of colonialism, imperialism, and military supremacy aren't anything new. What is considered "fair game" for thematic devices in entertainment seems to be based on temporal proximity to the subject matter and also simply what is currently deemed to be "tasteful." If there was an as-successful board game based on conquering Asia and Europe as Genghis Khan, nobody would bat an eye. And yet Genghis Khan was responsible for actions that were arguably worse multiple times over than anything that occurred in Puerto Rico during the colonial period. > “I think there’s a growing understanding that using historic colonialism in a sanitized fashion—omitting all of its wrongs—has its own problems,” Reuss said. “Even though you’re not depicting torture, rape, massacre, enslavement, and genocide in your game, you’re promoting a false narrative about colonialism, which covers up all of those terrible things.” All these things occur and have occurred during war and we have hundreds (thousands?) of games about warfare that do not include these topics. Is every single one these games promoting a false narrative as well? I suppose he might agree. Regardless, I think it's infeasible to expect every game that uses colonialism or war as a device to have some sort of comprehensive moral indictment of the things it portrays.