When my kids were really little, I played board games with them to entertain them and to spend time with them and enjoy their company because I loved them. This was for FUN and not to win or something.
We would make up additional rules, like youngest goes first, to help level the playing field some. When they got older and owned video games, I would handicap myself when playing against them on games I was actually good at, like Tetris or Dr. Mario.
I'm terrible at most video games and my younger son -- about three years old at the time -- quickly stopped asking me to help him with games like Teenaged Mutant Ninja Turtles because I was THAT bad. He would wait for his older brother to get home from kindergarten and ask HIS help to get past a hard spot.
When we played the board game version of Civilization, we would include Africa as one of the starting places because my younger son just liked being Africa. Africa is not normally included when you play a three-person match.
Once, he was Africa and I was Egypt -- both positions on the northern edge of the African continent -- and my older son started with some European country. This meant my older son was able to do a land grab and take over all of Europe -- more land than he could come up with population or troops to even occupy -- and trap us both in Africa.
So, A. AHA! THIS is why they don't include Africa in the three-player rules and B. I'll be damned if I'm going to attack your younger brother as the only hope I have of growing my empire when YOU are the one being a butt.
So I stubbornly attacked my older son over and over, though it was pointless and I had no hope of winning. This was so uncharacteristic of my playing style he eventually asked "What's up with THAT?" and I talked about how he had put me and his brother in a terrible situation and etc.
The lightbulb went on and he was, thereafter, generally, LESS of a butt to people, especially POINTLESSLY a butt for no real reason. I was thrilled he got such a great lesson from a GAME and not from someone kicking the crap out of him in meat space.
If they fought over one of their video games, I would take it away and lock it up and lecture them that "Games are for HAVING FUN and you CLEARLY are NOT HAVING FUN. You are DOING IT WRONG." and they could have the game back if they brokered a peace deal. They quickly learned to a. broker deals in short order and b. STOP FIGHTING to begin with about games.
In contrast, their father would take games away from them as punishment -- to HURT THEM -- for some wholly unrelated issue. And then keep the game locked up for some stupidly long time even if they resolved whatever got it taken away to begin with.
Our sons are adults now. They don't talk with their father. I can't imagine why.
We would make up additional rules, like youngest goes first, to help level the playing field some. When they got older and owned video games, I would handicap myself when playing against them on games I was actually good at, like Tetris or Dr. Mario.
I'm terrible at most video games and my younger son -- about three years old at the time -- quickly stopped asking me to help him with games like Teenaged Mutant Ninja Turtles because I was THAT bad. He would wait for his older brother to get home from kindergarten and ask HIS help to get past a hard spot.
When we played the board game version of Civilization, we would include Africa as one of the starting places because my younger son just liked being Africa. Africa is not normally included when you play a three-person match.
Once, he was Africa and I was Egypt -- both positions on the northern edge of the African continent -- and my older son started with some European country. This meant my older son was able to do a land grab and take over all of Europe -- more land than he could come up with population or troops to even occupy -- and trap us both in Africa.
So, A. AHA! THIS is why they don't include Africa in the three-player rules and B. I'll be damned if I'm going to attack your younger brother as the only hope I have of growing my empire when YOU are the one being a butt.
So I stubbornly attacked my older son over and over, though it was pointless and I had no hope of winning. This was so uncharacteristic of my playing style he eventually asked "What's up with THAT?" and I talked about how he had put me and his brother in a terrible situation and etc.
The lightbulb went on and he was, thereafter, generally, LESS of a butt to people, especially POINTLESSLY a butt for no real reason. I was thrilled he got such a great lesson from a GAME and not from someone kicking the crap out of him in meat space.
If they fought over one of their video games, I would take it away and lock it up and lecture them that "Games are for HAVING FUN and you CLEARLY are NOT HAVING FUN. You are DOING IT WRONG." and they could have the game back if they brokered a peace deal. They quickly learned to a. broker deals in short order and b. STOP FIGHTING to begin with about games.
In contrast, their father would take games away from them as punishment -- to HURT THEM -- for some wholly unrelated issue. And then keep the game locked up for some stupidly long time even if they resolved whatever got it taken away to begin with.
Our sons are adults now. They don't talk with their father. I can't imagine why.