It's an opinion that's almost unheard of among people my age, but I really, really don't enjoy playing Cards Against Humanity.
This is the "game for horrible people." Does that mean that I don't like being a "horrible person?" Am I some kind of uncool, fun-hating fool?
This is basically the equivalent of going to a party and not drinking any beer. It's abnormal. People will bother you about it. Everybody else loves it, so why can't you?
Usually, I'll keep quiet about it. Sometimes I'll feebly suggest a different game. Usually I just go along with it and try to enjoy myself, with varying success.
My issue with the game has nothing to do with how "offensive" it tries to be. I am not at all bothered by the controversial cards, such as "Kids with cancer," "Auschwitz" or any of the various cards that
refer to the genitalia of African-American men. To be clear, I don't even care about the offensive combinations of cards that are possible, such as:
No, I dislike the game because it just isn't fun. It tries way, way, way too hard to be shocking, edgy and offensive and all it accomplishes is being bland after the first few rounds.
And I'll admit this much: the first few rounds are a lot of fun. When the game first starts, every combination of cards that comes up seems surprising and hilarious. Sometimes, the judge has a hard time choosing because every combination is just so good. Unfortunately, this doesn't last for very long. From my experience, the fun drops off exponentially as the rounds go on. By the time every player has been the judge at least once, I generally find that I have to force myself to laugh at even the silliest card combinations, and that the game has run its course.
Let me explain my feelings using movies as an analogy. Take two of Quentin Tarantino's most famous films: "Pulp Fiction" and "Kill Bill: Volume 1." In this example, "Pulp Fiction" is comparable to the game Apples to Apples, the superior older brother of Cards Against Humanity. "Pulp Fiction" is Tarantino's masterpiece, a film that ingeniously tiptoes the line between extreme violence and everyday life. Despite its reputation for being gruesome, most of the film's running time is dialogue between the characters; in fact, the dialogue is arguably the most memorable aspect of the film. The extreme violence does appear, often at disturbing and random times, but it is not the entire focus of the movie. And for this reason, the action is exciting and fun for us to watch every time it happens on screen. 
"Say 'I brought Cards Against Humanity' AGAIN!"
Cards Against Humanity, then, is like "Kill Bill." Now, "Kill Bill" is still a good, entertaining movie, but it is no "Pulp Fiction." Why? In my opinion, it is because Tarantino allows the action to get stale. By the time the Bride finally murders O-Ren Ishii, she has literally sliced through hundreds of nameless stock characters. Hundreds! For me, this made the final encounter with O-Ren feel anti-climactic and even tame in comparison. 
(Before anyone says it, I acknowledge that both "KB" and Cards are being over-the-top intentionally. I just don't personally find that style to be very entertaining.)
What I'm trying to say with this needlessly long analogy is that less is more. Apples to Apples may not feature a set filled with hundreds of crazy, offensive cards, but that's what makes it great. On the rare occasions when Apples does produce something truly offensive, it ends up being hilarious because it is so unexpected. When the entire game is trying to create these moments, the gimmick wears off pretty quickly. At least for this Odyssey writer, that is.
