Eric, I am not familiar with any board games which "make real" the relationship between mobility, development and land use but I would hazard to say that this relationship is far more complex than that which can realistically be represented in any kind of "game". In fact, our succes in finding and applying such "simplifying" representations of reality which can then be "optimized for greater efficiency" may perhaps be one of the primary causes leading us down our dangerous path of near-sighted mono-cultural development. Focusing on certain aspects of our cities/civilization/culture/etc. independently of all the rest blinds us to the complex tapestry of relationships which make up our world. Sure cars and urbanism don't mix well - there is nothing new there. But we started destroying our cities before the car was so ubiquitous! At the moment I am reading a fascinating book on <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Preserving-Worlds-Great-Cities-Destruction/dp/060980815X/sr=8-1/qid=1159279059/ref=sr_1_1/002-8807979-5458466?ie=UTF8&s=books">Preserving the World's Great Cities: The Destruction and Renewal of the Historic Metropolis </a> by Anthony Max Tung which describes a number of policies which have succeded [at urban preservation] in different places and at various times througout history.... It is probably more edifying (for me at least) than the 'elephant in the bedroom' rehash. I don't mean to belittle the book - it sounds interesting, but on this forum it is probably already 'preaching to the converted'. <div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">A key tenet of the New Mobility Agenda and the core of all that concerns us here is that there is a rather simple but ineluctable geometric conflict between cars and cities. Namely that most cities can accommodate a certain quantum of private cars in traffic and within their existing urban form and infrastructure up to a certain point - beyond which something has to give. </blockquote><div> Can focusing on this "rather simple but ineluctable geometric conflict between cars and cities" put urban quality of life back on the agenda? Perhaps.... Making all of the hidden subsidies to the automobile more transparent may increase people's awareness of the "true" costs of motorization, but I think that most of us prefer to live with our heads in the sand. There are implicit (and explicit) subsidies in all sorts of things (not only in transportation), and certainly no one wants to pay any more taxes! Consider for a moment how our entire culture has evolved around "instant gratification" and everything has become a commodity - we no longer develop long term relationships with anything. Can you put that in a game? The winner is not the one who "accumulates the most stuff" but rather the one who leaves behind the "best place". I hope that we can agree that at the end of the day it is "life" that is important, and not only mobility! If we are ever to find any kind of  'sustainable solution' to our problems, I think that we need to find some way to shift our perspective to the long-term. What legacy do we want to leave behind to our off-spring? Cheers, Zvi </div> </div>