Carol wrote: "... there's a Canadian game company that is all about cooperative games http://www.cooperativegames.com/ <http://www.cooperativegames.com/> and their sister site: http://childandnature.com/index.html"; Yes, these folks were a family business originally by name of Animal Town, with a printed catalog pre-Internet. Nature-loving, family-loving, quite out of step with the violence-centered gaming culture that captured consumers' attention for many years. Our resources page happily includes a link to cooperativegames.com. Long may they thrive. "... I would love to see some good cooperative games in Ryan's eventual curriculum, but that can't be the whole curriculum. It isn't indicative of our current society of game play, after all. Most games out in the market aren't cooperative." Sadly, that phrase, "indicative of our current society of game play," hits the nail on the head. We retain the old paradigms and infect subsequent generations with them. In play form they are swallowed like a sugar-coated poison tablet. We should ask of each game, what makes it enjoyable, would I want to play it again? We should ask, is this fun to play even if I don't win? If it's too goody-goody, that can be a turn-off, too. If it forces players to cooperate, even to their own disadvantage whether it feels right or not, that's not what I advocate, either. Collaboration comes closer, where by free choice players interact with others for their own and each other's benefit. There are not many games out there like that, and I'd appreciate references to existing ones. And I'd love to see more being designed. "... I think I'd like to add in: Break the unwritten rule of 'it has to be competitive...'" Thank you, Carol, for expanding the dialog! -- Kate (She who has spoken her piece and will say no more.)